Tree of Life Synagogue Murderer Sentenced to Death
Photo by Dmitry Brant, CC BY-SA 4.0
The gunman found guilty in the murders of 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue in 2018 was sentenced by a federal jury of 12 to death.
A 12-person federal jury reached its unanimous decision for Robert G. Bowers, 50, of Baldwin, Pa., after a tw0-month trial in which anguished survivors described the mass shooting on Oct. 27, 2018, in terrifying detail.
In addition to killing a total of 11 members of all three congregations that shared the synagogue — Tree of Life, Dor Hadash and New Light — Bowers wounded two other congregants and several police officers.
“Each death is enough on its own. The weight of all that loss is more than enough,” Eric Olshan, U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania, said in his closing statement Monday. “The defendant was proud he carried out the worst mass shooting against Jews in U.S. history. Weigh it — and when you’re done, impose the only punishment that is sufficient under our law: A sentence of death.”
Prosecutors said during the trial the gunman planned to kill as many Jewish people as possible and was motivated by a deep-seated antisemitism. Bowers’s defense team did not dispute that he carried out the crimes, but said he suffered from mental illness and had a troubled personal history that made it difficult for him to think rationally.
Jurors had convicted Bowers in mid-June on 63 hate-crime and gun-related counts. In capital cases, juries are required to deliver a separate verdict after additional testimony in a penalty phase of the trial. The Pittsburgh jury deliberated for more than nine hours over two days before reaching a unanimous decision, as required for a death sentence in a federal case.
District Judge Robert J. Colville asked Bowers to stand as the verdict was read. Lead defense attorney, Judy Clarke, then asked the judge to poll jurors individually to confirm their decision. Bowers did not look at the jurors as they affirmed their votes.
Colville will hold a sentencing hearing for Bowers on Thursday, court officials said.
The verdict offered a measure of justice for the victims’ families, survivors and others throughout the Squirrel Hill neighborhood, where the synagogue has remained closed since the attack.
Family members and Jewish leaders were present each day of the trial at the Joseph F. Weis Jr. federal courthouse. Many of them testified about the devastation Bowers caused and the loved ones whose lives were cut short. Bowers sat next to his lawyers each day of the trial but he did not testify.
Those killed were: Rose Mallinger, 97; Bernice Simon, 84, and her husband, Sylvan Simon, 86; brothers David Rosenthal, 54, and Cecil Rosenthal, 59; Dan Stein, 71; Dr. Jerry Rabinowitz, 66; Joyce Fienberg, 75; Melvin Wax, 87; Irving Younger, 69; and Richard Gottfried, 65.
First of all, I’m sorry. I don’t know if it’s worse etiquette to keep threadjacking the Einstein comments with theology and the death penalty, or to shift the conversation between threads.
Historically, depending on the society, Bowers might have been killed for this crime, or exiled, lose an arm, have to pay a fine for each death, or even get away with it if the culture was particularly anti-Semitic. If he didn’t have the payment, he’d potentially have to stay in prison until his family paid the fine, or work as a serf until he paid it off.
I’m fine with society saying that Bowers can never walk free. We should all be able to agree on that. The old Catholic position, pre-mass incarceration, was that the authorities could decide that it’d be safer to have him put to death than allow him to walk free. Wonderful. I’d say that pre-supermax, that argument would still hold up. We have every reason to believe that anyone who would have committed this crime would be a danger to guards and inmates. I think the question is, can we still make that argument now that supermax facilities exist? What about in societies that don’t have the capacity or expenses to operate one? Beyond that, is it possible that life imprisonment in a supermax facility constitutes cruel and unusual punishment, and if so, could we say that the death penalty is more humane?Report
I’m going to add one more thing. There was a comment here that got deleted that was both cruel and medically ignorant. I assume it came from our site’s troll, and if he’s reading this I just want to say that it’s the combination of ignorance and obnoxiousness that guarantees that no one here will ever listen to a word you say.Report
IMO the argument against the death penalty isn’t so much the easy cases where guilt isn’t in doubt, it’s the hard cases, where imposing it requires more faith in human infallibility than is warranted by the evidence.Report
Yeah. The “what about rapeincestmotherslifeindanger” question isn’t Troy Davis. It’s John Williams King. It’s this guy.
But what about if the cops messed up?
What about if the cops lied?
What about if the real killer is still out there?
Those questions sort of dry up and float away.Report
Theology and/or philosophy have to deal with the “is this ever justified” question. We can agree that this guy is a worst-case scenario though. He’s practically a thought experiment.Report
This is potentially an insensitive comment and if the grown ups at OT decide it isn’t appropriate I defer to their judgment. However I think this speaks to the discussion yesterday about where the country is on anti-semitism, and the larger racial/inter ethnic paranoia among the extremely online across the political spectrum. They took 12 regular citizens, had them look at this crime, and said it was so bad justice requires that the perpetrator die for it. That is way more reflective of common attitudes on this subject where it really matters than whatever right wing celebrity, left wing intersectionalist, or madman open to third parties has to say about the subject.Report