Keith Cook Murder Case

On March 7, 1998, 55 year old Mrs. Jadine Russell and her daughter were involved in a minor automobile accident. While on the side of the road assessing the damage, Jadine, her daughter, and two police officers, were taken by surprise, when alleged drunk driver, Keith Cook, lost control of his pickup hitting Jadine’s car. The vehicles then plowed into the four victims as they stood there. “All were hurt, but Jadine suffered the most severe injury when the car pinned her against a fence and ruptured her spleen, causing massive internal bleeding and leaking blood into her abdomen” (Baxtrom). Jadine, in need of serious medical attention, refused a blood transfusion. Her religious views, as a Jehovah’s Witness, kept her from receiving the blood

However, Cook, who was on probation for a past DUI should be accountable for his actions. He is not the primary cause of Jadine’s death. By the time Jadine reached the hospital, she had lost half the blood in her body. At that time, she made her final decision and refused a blood transfusion that would have saved her life. National Blood Authority chair Leigh McJames acknowledges, “There are medical situations in which a blood transfusion is the only option. And in these situations, it can make the difference between life and death” (Nogrady). Had Jadine gone against her faith and taken the blood, she more than likely would be alive today, and Cook would not be facing life in prison if found guilty of murder. Some people believe that Cook is responsible for her death and their argument shows some validity. They argue if Cook did not drink and drive, Jadine would not have died. In contrast, others claim that if Jadine was not religious, she would have accepted the transfusion and be alive today. Although, both sides show valid points, Cook did cause the chain of events that led to Jadine’s death, but she held the final key. She had to decide, do I take the blood and live, or do I stay true to my faith and die? Jadine’s devotion to her religion and choice to be faithful came with a consequence, her life. Therefore, Cook should not spend the rest of his life in prison because of her conscious choice of religion

The Bible is interpreted in many different ways by different groups. In the book of Ecclesiastes 7:17 it reads, “Be not over much wicked, neither be thou foolish: why shouldest thou die before thy time?”(KJV) This verse contradicts with the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ belief in which they will not accept a blood transfusion to save their own lives. God says, “why shouldest thou die before thy time?” which can be interpreted to mean do what you have to do to live. Jadine was courageous and devoted to her religion. Her husband, James Russell, also a devoted Jehovah’s Witness, states, “I don’t know why they’re going to raise the blood issue, he killed her. Now they’re trying to give the blame to someone else” (Baxtrom). He also states, “She was a good wife, and I would have done anything to save her other than a blood transfusion” (Gonzales). In other words, he believes Cook is the one who killed Jadine, but he would not say yes to the blood transfusion in order to save her life. It is hard to believe that Cook may spend the rest of his life in prison when Jadine and her husband made a choice and said, “No blood” when her life was on the line, and for this decision, they must be accountable. Likewise, Cook must be responsible for his actions, but he is not be