PDF Format – 1999 Voters Guide

Side Bars – Who We Are – The Name – Christian, not Conservative – A 19th Century Christian Theologian’s Comments on Secular Conservatism – Crime and Restitution – Juries: Past and Present – The Notorious Ox and Safety – Self-Incrimination and the Bible – Judges versus Computers – Open Pits and Paying Your Own Way

Ballot Recommendations Summary Measure 68 Measure 69 Measure 70 Measure 71 Measure 72 Measure 73 Measure 74 Measure 75 Measure 76

Measure 70
Amends Constitution: Gives the State, through the prosecutor, the right to demand a jury trial in criminal cases.

EXPLANATION:
Under current law, only the accused person has the right to demand a jury trial in a criminal case. If he prefers a judge to determine his guilt or innocence, he can waive a jury trial. Under this measure, the prosecuting attorney could demand, and get, a jury trial even if the accused person wanted a trial by a judge.

RECOMMENDATION:
NO.

The jury system has deep roots in the Bible and in our English legal heritage. The Biblical roots for juries seem to rest in the “elders in the gate” (see Dt. 21:19,20; 22:15; 25:7; Joshua 20:4; Ruth 4:2,11;Lam. 5:14) and the Sanhedrin or Seventy (see Num. 11:16,17,24,25). [Grand Juries are made up of 23 jurors. According to John Eidsmoe, author and noted Christian constitutional expert and attorney, this number is based on the so-called “Lesser Sanhedrin,” which was composed of 23 men. The Greater Sanhedrin of 70 was composed of 3 such groups, headed by the High Priest.]

Our American heritage of trial by jury can be traced back to our colonial period, then back to Magna Carta in 1215, which was based on Alfred the Great’s ninth century Book of Dooms, which was had its roots in St. Patrick’s book on the Laws of Moses, whose roots, of course, were the Bible.

The original purpose of the jury, in the Bible, English history, and colonial history, was to provide a safeguard against the abuses of the King or State. Today’s juries are not of good caliber, nor of Christian tenor, So some defendants would understandably rather trust themselves to a judge than permit the prosecutor to make them face a possibly ignorant or prejudiced jury. This measure attempts a radical and, in our view, dangerous movement away from centuries of Christian legal history, and should be opposed. See Sidebar - Juries: Past and Present

This voters' guide produced by Parents Education Association, PAC.