Shalom, our courts allow circumstantial evidence, including forensics, but I believe that the only right use for any of that evidence would be in cross-examining two or more eyewitnesses.
If their independent testimonies agree, after cross-examination, with the attorneys doing the cross examination referring to all the evidence for the purpose of framing questions for the witnesses, then and only then would I agree that the death penalty was justified.
Simply because God's law only allows for conviction based on the testimony of eyewitnesses. Think how it would simplify our justice system, if it were to be modeled after God's laws.
There would be no prisons. Those guilty of crimes would pay restitution, unless the penalty was death. If the penalty was death, then, after independent testimony of two or more eyewitnesses agreed as to the murderer's guilt, the murderer would be put to death. No further appeals - just send him on to God's judgement.
Of course, I'd want to give the convicted murderer one last chance to make a decision about Jesus, say three days, then (no matter what his decision) execution and then God would welcome him into paradise or have the angels transport him elsewhere. God's justice would be pure and perfect.
Justice on earth, carried out according to God's law, is but a shadow of the perfect, but would serve, better than man's idea of justice, to restrain wickedness.
The trial and (if guilty) execution should be carried out in the fear and reverence of God, with all proper courtesy, but not undue pity, extended to the murderer.
But it will never happen that way in this world as long as the devil is loose, will it?
"To do justice and judgement is more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice." Proverbs 21:3
==)------- ~
John |
