Are there grounds for reversing D.C.-sniper's guilty verdict

CNN ^ | 24 November 2003 | Elaine Cassel

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

Based on the murder convictions, Muhammad was eligible for the death penalty, and the jury recommended that sentence.

The verdict first will be appealed to Virginia's Court of Appeals. Then, it will doubtless be appealed by the losing side to Virginia's Supreme Court, which must review all capital murder convictions. Several important legal points will be raised by the appeal.

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

"

Elaine Cassel, a FindLaw columnist, teaches law and psychology and practices law in Virginia and the District of Columbia. Her book, The Other War: The War At Home, a chronicle of the Bush Administration's dismantling of civil liberties since September 11, 2001, will be published in 2004 by Chicago Review Press."

[I can't wait. /sarcasm]

[Numbers Guy]

Let's release John Muhammad and give him a map to her house.

[rllngrk33]

I knew eventaully someone would try to rationalize not giving him the death penalty. I just didn't think it would happen this fast.

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

I know. I couldn't believe this when I read it.

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

Well, yeah but he'll need the gun and car, too.

[Jonah Hex]

Let me give you my personal opinion on whether the verdict will be reversed, based on my extensive first-hand experience with Virginia death penalty cases as a juror and lay expert.

No.

Virginia commonwealth law clearly establishes an accomplice can be charged and held just as accountable as the actual triggerman both in determination of guilt and punishment. This has led to system abuses in the past, however, with an accomplice serving more time than the triggerman. This often occurred after the triggerman bargained with the prosecutors for a reduced sentence in exchange for providing evidence against the accomplice.

"Honor among thieves". Yeah, right, pull the other one.

[Tijeras_Slim]

You just know this chick has a Mumia blow-up doll in her closet.

[Alberta's Child]

The way I see it, the legal system has no choice but to see to it that the two perpetrators are executed swiftly. I predict that all appeals will be denied in short order without a second thought.

The driving force behind this case is what I call "legal credibility." The legal system must exact very public justice in a high-profile case like this, in which an entire metropolitan area was gripped by fear for an extended period of time. If not, then people will naturally lose any sense of respect for the legal process.

If these two are not executed quickly, then the next time two snipers like this are seen in a rest area on an interstate in western Maryland, the last people to hear about it will be the "lawful authorities." The medical examiner will be called to the scene before the police are.

[William Tell]

The article seems to make some good points.

None of us wish to see these two animals breathe for even one day beyond what is absolutely necessary.

Nevertheless, extorting money is not necessarily terrorism, if that was, in fact, the murderers intention.

The problem with such laws is that the intention of someone should be assessed differently. We know that Muhammed and Malvo intended to kill their victims. We should only be interested in their justification. They had none. They deserve to be put to death.

If the conviction presumes that multiple murders have been committed, then the prosecution should be burdened with proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that multiple murders took place. If there ever was a case where shortcuts shouldn't be necessary I would imagine this is it.

I would not liked to have been the "white men in the white truck" that authorities were originally seeking. Since I own rifles and have owned a white truck, it would be a piece of cake for the BATF or their ilk to testify that there was a bullet "match" to one of my guns. Recent studies of bullet matching seem to indicate that there is too little science behind this.

Many criminals commit multiple crimes during their careers. Maintaining heavy penalties is a far superior means to handle these people than watering down the levels of proof required in our courtrooms.

[William Tell]

rllngrk33 said: "I knew eventaully someone would try to rationalize not giving him the death penalty."

Many people seem to confuse "due process" with leniency.

If the elements of a capital crime include that multiple killings took place, then there is nothing unreasonable about requiring proof beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant killed multiple people.

Simply having a family member testify that a killing took place does not necessarily constitute proof that a particular defendant is guilty of that killing.

I happen to believe that killing just one person intentionally should be a capital crime. That is not the law in most jurisdictions. Such laws raise the burden on prosecutors and due process is violated if the judge does not require the prosecutor to meet this burden.

Do you maintain that a single killing should justify the death penalty for the defendant?

If not, do you maintain that simply having a family member testify that a killing took place constitutes proof that the defendant committed the killing?

If not, do you maintain that the prosecution met their burden to prove that multiple killings took place?

And finally, if not, then do you maintain that the defendant should be put to death despite that proof was not presented that multiple killing were committed by the defendant?

[Moosilauke]

Let us hope the appeals courts narrowly construe the Virginia statute to limit it to its purpose: Targeting genuine terrorists, such as al Qaeda

What a disingenuous remark. Do a google look-up on this gal and you'll see that in her writings the only "terrorists" who appear are named Bush and Ashcroft.

[jocon307]

I am sure you are correct. In fact, if this woman has made the best case possible for reversal, it looks pretty bleak for Mohammed.

[Independentamerican]

I am not necessarily a death penalty advocate. But after having suffered ducking while I pump my gas and avoiding malls at night for a month I think that these to deserve to die. I remember when I was talking to a friend on the phone that lived in Bowie MD and when the news report came on about the shooting at the school where is brother attended he raced off the phone to go pick up his little brother. I don't know a single person in my neighborhood who was not terrified about having 2 people running around killing people randomly

[FormerlyAnotherLurker]

A friend had the same type of reaction. She absolutely hated guns, said she wouldn't be in a house with them not locked up. (I told her to go stand outside in the rain) Since the sniper shootings, she bought a 10mm. She even learned, sort of, how to use it. She was so proud of holding out against a death penalty verdict a year or 2 after college. Now, she says she'd even consider it if she's ever on another jury.