| Appeal planned for cop killer | ||
|
|
Lawyer claims ‘vengeance’ in death sentence for John Lewis
The defense attorneys for John Lewis, who was sentenced this week to die for killing Officer Charles Cassidy, said they plan to appeal the jury’s decision. Michael Coard and Bernard Siegel made their announcement after the jury made the decision to give Lewis death over life in prison. Coard said in his opinion the prosecution was seeking revenge in asking for the death penalty. “The first step in the appeal process is to file a post sentencing motion with the trial judge. If he rules against us, then we’ll appeal to the state Supreme Court,” he said. “Soon after Lewis was arrested and brought back to Philadelphia, I went to the DA’s office and said ‘we’ll plead guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for a life sentence,’ and they rejected that. We even agreed to waive the preliminary hearing and plead guilty to first-degree murder in exchange for life in prison and every offer was rejected. To me, this is nothing but vengeance.”Whether Lewis will actually be executed is open to speculation. The last person executed in Pennsylvania was Gary Heidnik in 1999. Heidnik kidnapped, tortured and raped six women and murdered two of his victims. Lewis will now join the other 221 death row inmates in Pennsylvania’s prisons. According to the state Department of Corrections, 71 are white, 18 are Hispanic, 2 are Asian and 130 are Black. Under Pennsylvania law, a defendant has to meet certain aggravating circumstances to warrant the death penalty — such has murdering a police officer. The jury decided that in Lewis’ case, the aggravating circumstances outweighed the mitigating circumstances. Assistant District Attorney Ed Cameron said the death penalty is appropriate in this case and strongly argued for it during his closing arguments. “The issue in this case is intent to kill,” Cameron told the jury. “That the defendant did so with specific intent to kill with malice. Cassidy is dead and the defendant killed him. That shows malice and intent. Every armed robbery is a first-degree murder waiting to happen. When you take a gun and point it at someone, it’s gone beyond just a robbery. The gun is the defendant’s intent.” The trial was a highly emotional one, with the families of the defendant and the victim on hand for the proceedings in a standing-room-only courtroom. It came to an end when the jury, after careful deliberation, decided that Lewis should face the death penalty for the murder of Cassidy. Lewis fatally shot Cassidy on Oct. 31, 2007, during an attempted robbery of a Dunkin’ Donuts. At the beginning of his trial, Lewis pleaded guilty to six counts of robbery and guilty to a general count of homicide. The jury had to decide if Lewis committed first- or second-degree murder, a decision they made last Thursday after about two hours of deliberation. On Tuesday the jury reached the decision that Lewis should die by lethal injection. “There's nothing I can say, nothing I can do to make anybody feel any better,” Lewis told the court. “I take this sentence with honor for Chuck, my family and the choices I’ve made. I apologize deeply.” The strongest evidence against Lewis was the surveillance tapes recorded in the Dunkin’ Donuts on the day of the attempted robbery that ended with murder. Although only a few minutes in length, it clearly showed Lewis turning around, taking two steps toward Cassidy and then firing his weapon. “Lewis heard the door open,” Cameron said. “He reacted, he turned around and took one step forward and then another step. It was sufficient time to the defendant to act. At the time he took the gun, aimed and fired. How can you say he didn’t mean to kill? He got closer; he took aim. He knew what he was doing. He meant what he was doing.” Lewis, a high school drop out, started committed a string of robberies on Sept. 18, 2007, before crossing paths with Cassidy on Oct. 31. Coard said he asked his client several times what motivated him to start committing armed robbery. “Why? I don’t know. I met with him shortly after they brought him back to Philadelphia and he couldn’t give any real answer,” Coard said. “I don’t know whether there’s a disconnect in his head or what. But if I were to speculate, I would say that he decided he wanted some money and was going to take some money. Like a lot of young people, he wanted fast money and got it illegally.”
Set as favorite
Bookmark
Email this
Hits: 121 Trackback(0)
Comments (0)
 Write comment
|
TrackBack URI for this entry
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Show/hide comments