Matthew David Stewart's attorneys want judge to declare death penalty unconstitutional

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • arand Huntsville, u
    Jan. 15, 2013 9:32 a.m.

    Actually, it really makes no difference. If the death sentence is brought down, he will still spend probably over 20 years of appeals and have a nice cozy cell all to his self with cable TV.

    I would rather see life without possibility of parole with hard labor and no TV. I'm sure we could find some rocks for him to break up or pot holes to fill. I would suggest a ball and chain and striped clothing though.

  • Schwa South Jordan, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 11:29 p.m.

    This case is an interesting intersection of gun ownership rights, poor treatment of veterans for things like PTSD and post-war employment, and the militarization of the police force.

    1) Gun debates lately focus a lot on defending your home from invaders. Here you have an armed and trained war veteran who's door was busted open in the middle of the night with a no-knock warrant.

    2) Here you have a veteran who had a crappy job (Walmart) and was self medicating with marijuana because he had PTSD.

    3) The police work by Ogden PD is notoriously poor. Just recently they busted in the wrong house, scaring the crap out of some poor innocent lady. Why couldn't they search his house when they knew he was at work, and simultaneously arrest him there when they knew he'd be unlikely to be armed? The tactics used were more likely to result in violence.

    As for his Constitutional argument, it's interesting. I doubt a judge will want to rule in their favor, though.

  • Kellie Orem, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 9:06 p.m.

    To Mukkake:

    It's fine for the government to engage in warfare to protect our land, families, and freedoms from tyrants. You're mixing apples and oranges here.

  • Mukkake Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 7:08 p.m.

    [To Mukkake: Yes, it's fine for the government to kill people who intentionally murder others. Got it?]

    Got it. Lemme just fetch all the veterans. Many of whom were party to the "intentional murder of others", including civilians, children, government agents, and democratically elected politicians.

    Oh, but that's right, its all arbitrary and relative. No, please, continue on with you self-righteousness.

  • Utah_1 Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 6:58 p.m.

    There are several safety measures that Utah Law has now and has recently added re: appeals etc. for the death penalty, but the death penalty has been used from the time of Noah, predating the Law of Moses, and it appropriate in some cases.

    He is accused of killing one police officer and wounding five others. If proven guilty of aggravated murder he should be executed. If that is all the defense has to offer.

  • Kellie Orem, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 6:24 p.m.

    To Mukkake: Yes, it's fine for the government to kill people who intentionally murder others. Got it?

  • athought Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 6:00 p.m.

    It's also wrong for this loser to kill a government representative, ie. Officer Francom, or is it not? Would it have been different if it had just been a citizen? Or how about a family member? You must be a member of the ACLU. These killers aren't in the wrong, right? We're infringing on their Civil Liberties -- those same ones they chose to take away from someone else. If the death penalty fits, sure, let's go for it, and in this case it's totally justified in my opinion. I'll bet you would be saying something completely different if this had been your son who was killed. The mistake the police made that day was they let him live to pull all this crap.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 5:49 p.m.

    Re: "Matthew David Stewart's attorneys want judge to declare death penalty unconstitutional"

    No doubt. And, their argument is a novel one, at least. Amounting to a demand for equal treatment of all accused murderers, regardless of the nature and quality of their crime, their victim, or their past record.

    Which, itself, would be a violation of case law.

    But better minds will examine and reject it. And, if prosecutors don't chicken out, as they did recently in another high-profile case, this cynical miscreant should end up where he so richly deserves to be -- on death row.

  • DN Subscriber 2 SLC, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 5:37 p.m.

    Sorry, guys, that is just another delaying tactic. The Supremes have repeatedly upheld the death penalty, and cop killers certainly are within the acceptable winners of the ultimate penalty for their crimes.

    Let's quit the stalling and get on with justice.

  • Mukkake Salt Lake City, UT
    Jan. 14, 2013 4:24 p.m.

    Now lets here all the comments that support the death penalty, most likely from the same people that complain about violence in media and big government.

    Remember, its wrong for the government to get involved in our lives and wrong for Tarantino to make violent movies, but its fine for the government to kill people.