This seems to be the right forum.
I was watching TV and there was a re-enactment of a courtroom scene, the witness was sworn in by placing their hand on a bible and swearing to tell the truth so help them god.
Does this still happen today?
If so, can it be refused?
If refused, what are the consequences?
I did a search for this and didn’t find anything, sorry if it’s been covered.
I don’t know if it’s been eliminated everywhere, but I don’t think it’s common to swear on a Bible. You merely have to vocally agree to tell the truth when prompted by the judge. I’ve been sworn in twice. Once I had to raise a hand and the other time I didn’t even have to do that. It was little more than “Do you swear to tell the truth to the best of your knowledge in these proceedings?” “Yep.”
The last time I sat on a jury, about 2 years ago, they didn’t use any book. They simply raised their hand.
Ain’t no thang! I peeded some. 
Yes, it still happens. Yes, it can be refused, and the consequences are nothing. You’re making either an “oath or affirmation,” and you get to pick which one.
Every time I have testified in court I have sworn on a bible. I am totally nonreligious so the book has no meaning to me. I consider the ritual to just be a physical sign of the oath I am taking which does have meaning to me. And making a point about my personal beliefs seems inappropriate at the time.
So what does raising your right hand do? How is that any different that raising your left hand, or your right leg? Does that mean that if I raise my right hand, but crossed the fingers of my left hand behind my back then I’m not really swearing? It seems like such a pointless ritual. Just ask the damn question… are you going to tell the truth or not?
Everybody knows that raising your right hand is legally equivalent to saying “no backsies.”
When I was on jury duty in California I don’t recall witnesses using the Bible. I know that when we got sworn in as a jury we didn’t use one. Other states might be different. Now where I live if they used religious books to swear people in they’d need quite a library of them.
Looks like it’s a holdover from the 17th century. According to this article, a number of people that had previously been in court for a crime were branded on the right hand -
What jurisdiction(s) have you testified in? I’m not disputing, just curious. I have tried cases in at least 10 states and have never seen a Bible in court.
He’s a cop in NJ IIRC.
I have always affirmed that I will tell the truth. The last time I’m sure I was asked to swear or affirm. Only two previous times I recall so it’s not much of a sample. Since Quakers were a significant part of the population in the early days of the country and they don’t like the idea of swearing an oath it’s probably always been allowed.
This would mean more to me than a bible, I’d be very truthful if someone had me by the balls while questioning me.
It always seemed to be a non-deterrent to lying. If a person is going to lie believer or not they will. I guess when it’s all said and done we still have to take a persons word for it that they’re not going to lie.
Neat. That’s a keeper.
The whole “swearing in” deal is just a setup for perjury, which requires “an intentional act of lying after a person has taken an oath or affirmation to tell the truth.”
Let’s assume that the ritual itself is silly. You know what it means though. There you are in front of a guy in a black robe you can send you to jail if you screw up with your right hand in the air and promising to tell the truth. You know you can go to jail if you later do not tell the truth.
This is easily distinguishable in your mind from telling your wife that this dress does not make her look fat or you promise that you won’t drink too much with the guys later tonight. If you lie after raising your right and and swearing or affirming you will tell the truth, this ain’t like lying to your buddies. Even if the individual actions are foolish, it gets the job done.
