Judge Excludes Religious Appeal In Closing Arguments

Monday's Philadelphia, Mississippi Evening Bulletin reported on a fascinating ruling made by Mississippi federal district court judge Michael P. Mills. Trial attorney Jim Waide represents a police officer in a suit in which the officer claims he was fired because he criticized the Grenada, Mississippi police chief. Attorney Waide is known for appealing to jurors' religious beliefs in his closing arguments. For example, he has been known to ask the jury to consider "what would Jesus do?". At the request of attorney Gary Friedman, representing defendants, the judge has issued an order prohibiting either attorney from making religious references "in such a manner as can reasonably be construed to indicate that the jury should consider the teachings of or beliefs of the deity or any religious references in addition to or to the exclusion of the law." Friedman argued that counsel should not be put in the position of having to object to religious references in front of the jury.In explaining his order, Judge Mills wrote: "Religious values should not be used for temporal or adversarial gain or to invoke sectarian prejudice or bias. Such tactics have no utility in an unbiased search for the truth and as such are improper in the courtroom." Needless to say, attorney Waide does not agree, arguing that the nation's Christian heritage and the law are intertwined.