By: Gerry Wagschal
In Thane Rosenbaum’s book, the Myth of Moral Justice he discusses the Clara Harris case as an example of a court only looking at bodily harm instead of looking at spiritual violence. For example, what happened to Clara Harris, as a result of her husband committing blatant adultery did not carry much legal weight. However, is it interesting to note that homage was paid to spiritual violence in recent decision in a murder case in Selmer,TN. In that case, Mary Winkler, the wife of a preacher, got a shot gun out of a closet and shot her husband in the back when he was asleep. On it’s face, it looked like a cut and dry murder case. But the jury took spiritual violence into consideration. One of the most poignant moments in the trial was when Mary Winkler, a preacher’ wife, talked about the white high heeled shoes that her husband forced her to wear during sex, the porn that she found on his computer, and the berating that she received from him on a continual basis. In the end, a jury convicted Mary Winkler of a much lesser charge than manslaughter — even though legally speaking this was likely the wrong result- and the judge sentenced her to about six months in jail. It appears this judge and jury put moral outcome ahead of result.
One could have another take on the jury giving the preachers wife a light punishment. The preacher’s wife was let off, not because her spirit was being harmed, but rather because the jury felt that her husband, a preacher, partially deserved to die – not for being immoral, but for being irreligious.
The thesis of the Myth of Moral Justice never asks juries to insert religious opinions. Instead, they should merely apply moral considerations. I think the former took place in this jury’s decision.