from Chileice:
An evaluation of the guilt and punishment of those involved based on biblical principles.
Overview:
I. Summary of Chileice’s judgment of parties involved in the TOL case.
A. The verdict
B. A brief commentary on the verdict
C. The sentencing
D. A brief rationale for the sentences
II. Analysis of the Judgment:
A. Biblical basis for guiding the administration of justice.
1. The role of righteousness vs. wrong in the Bible
2. The purpose of justice in the Bible
a. The OT model
b. The NT model
3. The evolution of criminal justice in the Bible.
4. A model for a NT application of justice in a modern setting: Restorative vs. punitive justice.
B. Case specific review of relevant penal codes.
C. Overarching purpose of the judgment rendered.
1. Preservation of family structure
2. Best potential for societal enhancement and protection
3. Restoration upheld
4. Personal responsibility maintained
5. Highest potential for a long-term, Christ-centered solution to a complex locus of problems.
I. Summary Judgment
A. The Verdict
After carefully reviewing the TOL case, the biblical evidence, penal codes and other relevant material, Chileice renders a verdict in this case.
The Living Intruder- is found guilty of breaking and entering, of unlawful trespass and of attempted robbery with intimidation.
The householder’s son- is found guilty of conspiracy to commit robbery, aiding and abetting a felon in the commission of a crime and purchase and use of illegal drugs. His charges are aggravated by the fact that they were committed against close family members.
The householder- is absolved of charges of murder in the death of the dead intruder by reason of self-defense. But he is found guilty of the charge reckless use of a firearm and use of deadly force with intent to do grave bodily harm.
The daughter- though not criminally responsible, should sense a moral obligation to inform responsible parties of the illegal activities of her sibling as well as to warn him directly. Had such occurred, it is possible the crime would have never been committed.
B. Commentary on the Verdict
The living intruder was obviously trying to rob the premises and was not going to desist even when confronted by the wife. He was unwelcome and the robbery continued with the young assailant intimidating the woman with the older robber’s tacit, if not explicit consent. His guilt would not be in doubt in any jurisdiction where I have lived.
The householder’s son appears to be the biggest villain of the group in a moral sense if not in the criminal one. He was willing to sell out his own family in exchange for drugs. Many penal codes make crimes against family members a more serious crime than the same crime committed against third parties. That seems to reflect the biblical concept that the family is the most important social unit created by God and that it should be held inviolate.
The householder, both biblically and in all western penal codes that I am aware of had the right to defend his wife from physical harm, his property from unlawful intrusion and himself from bodily harm. However, as will be shown later, the shooting of the second suspect did not fall into the category of self-defense in either a biblical nor criminal sense. The force used to stop an unarmed fleeing felon was not commensurate with the threat to his person and is therefore he should be held criminally and morally liable.
There is really nothing to say about the wife as she was an innocent crime victim.
The daughter, especially if she is a Christian, has a moral duty to warn her brother about his sins. To some degree as a member of the family, she also has a moral duty to respect her parents by informing them of behaviour which is damaging to her brother. However, there appears to be no ground for any kind of criminal sanction against her.
C. The Sentence
Chileice hereby sentences the following people for their criminal behaviour:
The living intruder- receives a six year prison sentence to be served as follows: 6 months in a supervised drug rehabilitation clinic with spiritual and psychological counseling followed by a six-month job training program for handicapped people with the remaining five years suspended in lieu of stringent probation including frequent random drug tests. The intruder must remain drug-free and gainfully employed. If the man is found to violate any of the conditions of his probation at any time during the probation period, he will be remanded to prison to serve the full remaining five years without possibility of parole.
The householder’s son is sentenced to six years in prison to be served as follows: Two years in the jail nearest his family with weekly supervised release to attend family counseling with his father and hopefully the other members of his family. The prisoner will be tested randomly and frequently for drugs and will be given drug counseling during his incarceration. The remaining four years will be suspended under strict parole which will require frequent random drug testing and gainful employment. Another condition for the suspension will be to participate in a program to warn area youth of the dangers of drugs. If the prisoner fails to meet the requirements at any time, he will be required to spend the remaining four years in prison without possibility of parole.
The householder will be sentenced to one year in prison and one year probation, but will have his prison sentence suspended provided that he agrees to attend family counseling with his son once a week for two years. His license to own and use firearms will be revoked and he will be required give up all firearms in his possession. If, during the two year period he has any contact with a firearm, he will be remanded to prison to serve an entire year behind bars.
D. A brief rationale for the sentences
Although more detail will be provided in the analysis section of this report, a brief analysis is provided for the reader.
Although the intruder fully deserves a six year sentence, he has already been deprived of the liberty he once enjoyed by now being paralyzed. This judge is hopeful that by making it clear to the offender that he is being given mercy, he will make a break with his past life and choose to make something of himself that he was unable to do when he was a fully functioning human being. However, should he decide to trample the mercy shown him by means of restitute justice, he will be shown the teeth of punitive justice.
Much of what has been said for the intruder can also be said for the son. It is this judge’s hope that both father and son can get to the root of the problem that has caused such a terrible division in their relationship. It is also hoped that by keeping the son out of a penitentiary with hardened criminals and close to people to whom he can be held accountable, that he will learn from his mistakes and still become a worthwhile member of society.
Again, should he refuse to move towards restoring relations with his family, and should he continue to experiment with drugs, the law will be swift to serve him a taste of more bitter judgment. It is hoped that the mother and daughter will chose to participate with the father and son in family counseling. If it is within my realm to do so, I recommend them to a Christian counselor who can work on the spiritual aspects of the family’s deep needs.
Although I could have been harsher on the father, I believe that the sentence given will be enough to dissuade him from being so cavalier with a firearm. It is possible that he will have to face a civil suit regarding the injuries incurred by the intruder. However, if such a suit is brought is not within the scope of this trial.
My hope is that the father will not have to go to jail to understand how fractured his relationship has been with his son. I hope that this sentence will allow the two of them to recover from this disastrous event together and that it will help them to face the future with hope.
II. Analysis of the Judgment:
A. Biblical basis for guiding the administration of justice.
1. The role of righteousness vs. wrong in the Bible.
The Bible is not first and foremost a legal text. Though it deals with some subjects in legal terms it is more a book of relationships. Both Old and New Testaments deal with God’s relationship to mankind and to individuals as well as will humankind’s and individual’s dealings with God and with one another. Though the Bible does list sins and details unwarranted behaviour, its primary concern is keeping people in right relationship with God and fellow man. In fact, unfaithfulness is the root sin that the Bible is most interested in dealing with. That unfaithfulness may be manifest in a myriad of actions, but those actions are rooted in not being in right relationship with someone or with God.
In Hebrew the normal word for sin is hatta (heth, teth, aleph) and is used over 500 times. According to many scholars, the word means to miss the mark, but even a more exact meaning would be to “anything less than the total” (Theological Word Book of the OT – TWOT p. 277).
The idea appears throughout the OT in regards to relationships and the idea of “wronging” someone. Here is an example of the force that the idea of “wrong” carries in the OT:
Restitution for Wrongs Numbers 5
5 The LORD said to Moses, 6 "Say to the Israelites: 'When a man or woman wrongs another in any way and so is unfaithful to the LORD , that person is guilty 7 and must confess the sin he has committed. He must make full restitution for his wrong, add one fifth to it and give it all to the person he has wronged. 8 But if that person has no close relative to whom restitution can be made for the wrong, the restitution belongs to the LORD and must be given to the priest, along with the ram with which atonement is made for him. 9 All the sacred contributions the Israelites bring to a priest will belong to him. 10 Each man's sacred gifts are his own, but what he gives to the priest will belong to the priest.' "
2. The purpose of justice in the Bible
a. The OT model
Wronging someone was a result of a breakdown in the relationship and the purpose of justice was to set the relationship straight again with an individual, the community or with God himself. Now there are specific acts which can be deemed wrong because they cause relationships to be are less than the wholeness God desires. And these acts can even be done unintentionally and still need to be resolved as we witness in the following passage:
The Guilt Offering Leviticus 5
14 The LORD said to Moses: 15 "When a person commits a violation and sins unintentionally in regard to any of the LORD's holy things, he is to bring to the LORD as a penalty a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value in silver, according to the sanctuary shekel. It is a guilt offering. 16 He must make restitution for what he has failed to do in regard to the holy things, add a fifth of the value to that and give it all to the priest, who will make atonement for him with the ram as a guilt offering, and he will be forgiven.
17 "If a person sins and does what is forbidden in any of the LORD's commands, even though he does not know it, he is guilty and will be held responsible. 18 He is to bring to the priest as a guilt offering a ram from the flock, one without defect and of the proper value. In this way the priest will make atonement for him for the wrong he has committed unintentionally, and he will be forgiven. 19 It is a guilt offering; he has been guilty of wrongdoing against the LORD ."
The righteous person is the one who maintains a right relationship with all those around him and who does not neglect his duties to God and others. The Ten Commandments themselves are an excellent example of how our actions must be kept in check in order to keep the wholeness God desired. Justice renders to the wronged something to make right what has gone wrong. It also gives to offender a chance to mend his ways or face a punishment that will take him/her out of community with those offended so that they can live in wholeness.
Although the OT system of justice may appear as if it were only punitive in nature, it is at its heart restorative. God sending his own people into exile was with the hope of having them return in a restored state. Almost the entire book of Isaiah could be quoted to prove this point. But early on there are warnings that punitive justice will be meted out if the mercy of the Lord is not accepted and if the people do not act faithfully with their God. Then as the book progresses we realize that the children of Israel are in captivity and yet God continues to call on them to learn from the experience and to be a restorative people themselves as we see in Isaiah 41:
8 "But you, O Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen,you descendants of Abraham my friend, 9 I took you from the ends of the earth, from its farthest corners I called you. I said, 'You are my servant'; I have chosen you and have not rejected you. 10 So do not fear, for I am with you; do not be dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you and help you; I will uphold you with my righteous right hand.
This one and the same Israel who had to face punitive justice was still redeemed. Redemption is the greatest theme of the Bible and the one which resounds through both Testaments. Jeremiah foresaw the coming of the new covenant, a covenant of restoration and forgiveness. (See Jeremiah chapters 30 and 33). God was always using broken vessels to do His work from day one. The Hall of Faith from Hebrews 11 could also be known as the hall of shame if it were not that God restores and transforms murderers, prostitutes, cheaters and the like and turns them into useful vessels. I think God’s basis for justice is restorative, even in OT times. But this apex of His mission of restoration is seen in the exemplary life, sacrificial death and life-giving resurrection of His son, Jesus Christ.
b. The NT model
The New Testament conception of wrong is much as it is in the OT with the exception that there is much less emphasis on exacting revenge. Things are made right, not through the equal suffering of the perpetrator but rather by an infinite grace that transcends the vilest of sins. In fact, the New Testament says that it is better to suffer at the hands of wrongdoers rather than to seek your own justice or revenge. Here are a few examples:
I Corinthians 6:
7The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
I Thessalonians 5:
14And we urge you, brothers, warn those who are idle, encourage the timid, help the weak, be patient with everyone. 15Make sure that nobody pays back wrong for wrong, but always try to be kind to each other and to everyone else.
I Peter 2:
18Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. 19For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. 20But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God. 21To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. 22“He committed no sin,
and no deceit was found in his mouth.” 23When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. 24He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. 25For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
But although Jesus also taught his followers to turn the other cheek, this passage also shows that one might justly suffer for a wrong that person committed. There is no credit for suffering like that. It is your just reward. Paul also made that clear in I Thessalonians 4:
3It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; 4that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, 5not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; 6and that in this matter no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you. 7For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life. 8Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit.
The Lord will punish wrongdoers, and he may do so in dramatic fashion as he did with Annanias and Saphyra, but he has also given that right to earthly authorities as Paul also states in Romans 13:
1Everyone must submit himself to the governing authorities, for there is no authority except that which God has established. The authorities that exist have been established by God. 2Consequently, he who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves. 3For rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you. 4For he is God's servant to do you good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword for nothing. He is God's servant, an agent of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer. 5Therefore, it is necessary to submit to the authorities, not only because of possible punishment but also because of conscience. 6This is also why you pay taxes, for the authorities are God's servants, who give their full time to governing. 7Give everyone what you owe him: If you owe taxes, pay taxes; if revenue, then revenue; if respect, then respect; if honor, then honor.
As a matter of fact, the NT never once intends to mete out justice in a theocratic way. Instead, appeal is made to the authorities that God has placed in power. Peter states the same thing as Paul in I Peter 2:
Submission to Rulers and Masters
13Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, 14or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. 15For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. 16Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. 17Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.
And in many ways that is just a reflection of our Lord’s teachings. Pilate was told by Jesus that he would have no authority were it not given to him. Jesus had also told Peter to render unto Caeser what was rightfully his.
3. The evolution of criminal justice in the Bible.
The OT model began with justice being dispensed by God through direct intervention or by the leaders of clans and nations. Israel, as a people had no system of justice of their own until the time Moses led them out of the wilderness. At such time, God chose to set up a theocratic form of justice based on religious and ceremonial laws as well as criminal laws. There was no difference between offending one law or the other.
However, that changed in the times of Samuel and this passage from I Samuel 8 is one that is rarely cited by anyone but which had a profound effect on biblical criminal justice:
4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, "You are old, and your sons do not walk in your ways; now appoint a king to lead us, such as all the other nations have."
6 But when they said, "Give us a king to lead us," this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the LORD . 7 And the LORD told him: "Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will do."
10 Samuel told all the words of the LORD to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, "This is what the king who will reign over you will do: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your menservants and maidservants and the best of your cattle and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, and the LORD will not answer you in that day."
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. "No!" they said. "We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles."
21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the LORD . 22 The LORD answered, "Listen to them and give them a king."
The people of Israel themselves rejected theocratic rule and God permitted it and has permitted it ever since. They wanted to be led by a king and wanted to leave in his hands the power of law making and justice dispensing. God clearly laid out to them the options of their choices and they accepted their own decision with eyes open.
Even as the rest of the OT unfolds, we see that ceremonial law was not treated with the criminal sentences imposed in the Mosaic Law. The Mosaic Law called for death to Sabbath breakers. Yet we can see through many passages in the prophets that people broke the Sabbath all the time and were not slain for their actions. And God permitted it to be that way.
By the time the writer of Hebrews wrote, he could state that the old covenant was obsolete. The ceremonial law was replaced by the reality of the death and resurrection of Christ, while the criminal law was in the hands of the state. Please read Hebrews 8 for the author’s complete treatment of the subject.
The original law became, as Paul so eloquently stated, a tutor to show people the error of their ways. And even the sacrificial system itself was called into question long before the birth of Jesus. One of Jesus’ favorite quotes (it is quoted four times in the Gospels) was from the book of Hosea chapter 6: 6 For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings.
Jesus continued to improve our understanding of what God was up to and the New Testament writers were quick to agree that the judicial authority lay in the hands of the state. That did not mean that all such authority was godly. It was permitted by God but not necessarily approved by Him. Isaiah 10 directly proves this point:
1 Woe to those who make unjust laws, to those who issue oppressive decrees, 2 to deprive the poor of their right and withhold justice from the oppressed of my people, making widows their prey and robbing the fatherless.
To fully understand what I am saying, it is worth reading the entire chapter. Though God was using the Assyrians to teach his people some lessons, he would still hold them accountable for their evil laws and the harm they did to his people by them. In the NT the authorities are recognized as legitimate, even if their actions aren’t. So how does that apply to the TOL case at hand?
4. A model for a NT application of justice in a modern setting: Restorative vs. punitive justice.
Obviously, we do not live in NT times. There were no guns, no electronic equipment to rob and no marijuana smoking teens playing basketball. How does the biblical information help us make a decision in this case? I think the Bible is very clear that any justice should be restorative. It should be to benefit society and to the degree possible, the perpetrator of the crime as well. In Christian teaching those who saw someone else in a sin were to go and try to correct that person and to put him right with God and others (See Galatians 6, 2 Cor. 5 as examples).
I believe that the justice dispensed in any case should try to maximize the benefit to society while trying to restore the fallen perpetrator. Now, if he is unwilling to be restored, then there remains a threat of punishment that will at least benefit society and which will hopefully wake up the perpetrator.
Jesus seems to have that type of justice in mind when he meets the woman caught in adultery in John 8 as well as when he teaches in Matthew 5:
23“Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.”
25“Settle matters quickly with your adversary who is taking you to court. Do it while you are still with him on the way, or he may hand you over to the judge, and the judge may hand you over to the officer, and you may be thrown into prison. 26I tell you the truth, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.”
Because God delegated to States (nations) the right to set laws and to govern, we must take that seriously in our judgment. If we believe God is all-powerful (and I do) then we must be quick to admit that God could topple any government at any time if it is not in His providence for them to be in power. Therefore we must also assume that he has at least permitted the laws to be structured as they are for a reason (perhaps still unknown to us).
For that reason, any true biblical model of justice will also include an examination of the laws as they currently exist. We may (and should, perhaps) question those laws and try to make them better. But any judgment made should not contravene those laws as they now stand because up to this point they have been permitted by God.
Therefore, to summarize, a NT model of justice applied today will have in mind the restorative purpose of justice as the NT lays out. It will also take into account the laws that have been promulgated within the society under the providence of God. It will maintain personal responsibility, while maximizing the possibilities for redemption and restoration in a peaceful society.
