Tired of ads? Subscribers enjoy a distraction-free reading experience.
Click here to subscribe today or Login.

A slap in the face.

That’s what a lot of the public thought of the decision to spare two-time convicted murderer Jessie Con-ui.

Not only a slap in the face to the family of Con-ui’s victim — corrections officer and Nanticoke native Eric Williams — but a slap to all hardworking, law-abiding citizens who do the right things every day.

We debated the pros and cons of sentencing someone to die in this space last week, and we are not going to rehash those points again today.

What we want to discuss are some potential tweaks to the death penalty process itself at the federal level to make it more efficient and taxpayer-friendly. And how — for those disgusted by the 11-1 jury vote that saved Con-ui’s life — our legislators can make it much more difficult to spare someone who’s killed a law enforcement officer.

First, the penalty phase in the Con-ui trial dragged out way too long. It was three weeks exactly from the time it started until the life term was handed down.

During that time, the lawyers trying to save Con-ui called to testify an assortment of folks from his past, several of whom admittedly had not seen or even spoken to the prison inmate in years.

Jurors heard from people Con-ui knew in grade school and others he grew up with. Probably relevant information for a defendant in his late teens or early 20s. But for a murderer who has reached his 40th birthday, hearing from such people is about as relevant as what Con-ui had for lunch on any given day determining life or death.

Taxpayers basically payed for a violent felon to enjoy a reunion with family and long-lost friends in court every day.

Our recommendation would be to cap the number of people a defense team could call in penalty phases of a capital murder trial. There should also be a rule stating the people called to testify must have had some meaningful contact with the defendant in the last five years or so. Isn’t that only common sense?

Meanwhile, on the heels of the unpopular jury decision, a woman started a change.org petition calling for a new law to make a death sentence mandatory for the murder of a law enforcement officer.

The problem is the Supreme Court has ruled mandatory death terms are unconstitutional. But those rulings were by previous versions of the high court. With a more right-leaning panel in place now, the automatic-death requirement might be allowed to stand. Our lawmakers should push for the idea.

A few other proposals:

• Eliminate the requirement that juries must vote unanimously for the death penalty. We believe a simple majority vote should be enough. That would mean one or two jurors would not have the power to overrule 10 or 11 others when it comes to such heinous crimes. After all, our whole system of government is based on majority rule. Why should this area of jurisprudence be any different?

• For those who have killed more than once, like Con-ui, take away their time in court. Make them watch the proceedings from the prison via teleconference, so they do not have the opportunity to be in the company of loved ones or friends.

But nothing will happen until and unless people get involved. If you are upset about last week’s verdict, make it known to those who have the power to make changes:

• Congressman Lou Barletta —202-225-6511 or https://barletta.house.gov/contact/email-me

• Congressman Matt Cartwright —202-225-5546 or https://cartwright.house.gov/contact/email-me

• U.S. Senator Pat Toomey —202-224-4254 or www.toomey.senate.gov/contact

• U.S. Senator Bob Casey — 202-224-6324 or www.casey.senate.gov/contact

— Times Leader

https://www.timesleader.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/web1_CON-UI.jpg.optimal.jpg