NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
A top legal expert and retired Navy JAG threw cold water on claims that Erika Kirk’s “grace” and “forgiveness” of Charlie Kirk murder suspect Tyler Robinson is a boon for the defense in its likely quest to avoid a death penalty case.
Cully Stimson, deputy director of the Heritage Foundation’s Edwin Meese Center for Legal and Judicial Studies and former George W. Bush administration Pentagon official, said observers should not conflate Erika Kirk’s “grace as a religious person” with erosion of legal accountability.
“Because she had the strength of character and the willingness to forgive as a Christian does not automatically have any bearing on whether the state can and should pursue the ultimate punishment — and whether the state and will get a judgment including the ultimate punishment,” Stimson said.
JUSTICE DEPARTMENT URGED TO SEEK DEATH PENALTY IN CAPITAL JEWISH MUSEUM MURDERS
As both a former prosecutor and defense attorney, Stimson said he can envision the case going to trial – though suggested it may not – and when it does that the defense will mount a case pointing to Erika Kirk’s comment.
“Look, even the decedent’s wife has forgiven our client, and therefore, there’s really no reason whatsoever to move forward with the death penalty,” Stimson envisioned the defense arguing.
The state of Utah could then agree, and drop capital punishment as a potential outcome, or dismiss the defense’s notion out of hand.
The case is not Kirk v. [Suspect], it is the State of Utah v. [Suspect], he remarked, noting that the state as a proxy therefore has even more leverage to bring the ultimate punishment against the suspect, regardless of how the defense may translate the Kirk family’s comments.
Stimson pointed to rape cases he has tried where the victim knew the suspect, comes forward, charges are pressed, evidence is presented – but when the suspect gets convicted, the victim suddenly doesn’t want extended or harsh punishment – whether for personal, religious or other reasons.
UTAH PROSECUTORS PREPARE POTENTIAL DEATH PENALTY CASE AGAINST CHARLIE KIRK SUSPECT TYLER JAMES ROBINSON
“In general, state victims’ rights statutes require the government – here, the prosecutor, to take into consideration the views of the victims or the victims’ family members. That doesn’t mean they have to follow them,” he said.
The case has also brought Utah’s unique death penalty scenarios back to the fore.
Utah – along with Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina – still allow firing squad as a method of execution. Until 1996, some states also permitted hanging – with Delaware murderer Billy Bailey being the last such convict to meet that end.
Stimson dismissed criticism of a firing squad as unconstitutionally cruel or unusual, and also rejected claims the death penalty itself is wrongfully antiquated.
RETIRED FBI AGENT WARNS OF ‘ASSASSINATION CULTURE’ AFTER LEARNING KIRK SUSPECT LIVED WITH TRANS PARTNER
“The death penalty is mentioned three times in the Constitution… the death penalty has been held constitutional since 1976.”
He said the firing squad would abide by the Eighth Amendment in that it is not cruel – as the convict dies instantly – and not unusual.
Other methods of execution like the electric chair, however, which are all but moot today, were more mainstream but at the same time less in line with the Eighth Amendment, Stimson said critics could argue in turn.
The electric chair did not always result in painless, instantaneous death, and the method may have been considered unusual in its construct, he suggested.
The military, he said, still has the firing squad as an execution method on its books, the retired JAG officer said, although the Pentagon has not executed anyone since Pvt. John Bennett was hanged at Fort Leavenworth for rape in 1916.
Read the full article here
