Juror in Murder Trial Rejects Insanity Defense Because the Defendant Conversed With God

[deucemagnet]

Juror in Murder Trial Rejects Insanity Defense Because the Defendant Conversed With God, Not With the Devil

<snip>
Take the verdict in the David Tarloff case. A Manhattan jury just convicted Tarloff, a man with schizophrenia, of the chillingly brutal murder, in 2008, of Kathryn Faughey, a psychologist. Tarloff’s lawyers had pleaded insanity on behalf of their client. Tarloff, they said,

… had a long history of delusions about communicating directly with God. He told doctors who examined him that his plan … had been sanctioned by the lord.

The jury didn’t buy that talking with God is a sign of mental illness, perhaps not wishing to open that particular can of worms. After all, if having a conversation with the Almighty is crazy, then hundreds of millions of Christians — some of the jurors no doubt included — ought to literally be considered out of their minds.

But here’s the fascinating part.

Jurors said they were convinced that even though Mr. Tarloff at times had delusions about communicating with God, he still knew that the robbery and murder were immoral in society’s eyes and understood that he had committed a crime.

“He’s sick, but I feel like he knew what he was doing,” said a juror, Dana Torres, 27, a construction worker. “For me, if he had said Satan told him to do this, it would have been a different story.”

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2014/03/31/juror-in-murder-trial-rejects-insanity-defense-because-the-defendant-conversed-with-god-not-with-the-devil/

But I'm sure they weren't trying to force their religion into the public sphere or anything.

[Heather MC]

1. GOD would never direct a person to kill

As long as you ignore the OT and the NT duh

[Iggo]

2. "After all, if having a conversation with the Almighty is crazy..."

"... then hundreds of millions of Christians — some of the jurors no doubt included — ought to literally be considered out of their minds."

Crazy, huh.

[progressoid]

3. Whaaaa?

If Satan tells you to do something, you're crazy. If God tells you to do the same thing, you're not?

[AlbertCat]

7. How do you know who's talking?

They sound a lot alike!

[Curmudgeoness]

4. I am flabbergasted.

If God told him to do this, why was he found guilty? If God sanctioned it, what does it matter if it is immoral in "society's eyes".

There are some juries that I am so grateful I did not have to deliberate with. This is definitely one of the top ones. I have to believe that there were more indications that this man was insane, and they ignored it all. For shame.

[deucemagnet]

5. I can't get my head around the logic, either.

Last edited Wed Apr 2, 2014, 09:46 AM - Edit history (1)

Thinking he was communicating with God does not make him insane, but he must have known what he was doing was wrong, even though God said it was okay. So, if I'm following this correctly (and I'm probably not), this either means God has no respect for the laws of this land and the jury dutifully rebuked Him, or that Mr. Tarloff completely misinterpreted what God was telling him while communicating directly to the Maker of All Things. However, if you substitute "Satan" for "God", he's clearly not guilty by way of insanity.

BTW, if God was talking to him, does that make God guilty of conspiracy to commit murder? Small potatoes after all of that Old Testament shit, but still rather un-Christian of Him.

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. There is a strange kind of logic to it - God does tell people to kill, in the Bible

whereas Satan tempts them with knowledge, riches and power. So if you believe the whole of the Bible, and hear a voice telling you to kill someone, it's more likely to be God than Satan. If a banker claims a voice told him to commit fraud, he's better off claiming it's Satan.