Unnecessary And Lengthy Appeals Lead Jurors To Decide Life In Prison Over Death

by Matthew Pasalic

In the April 6th 2006 edition of the Laurel Leader, it was reported that Robert Mark Billett was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole for murdering Cpl. Steven Gaughan and three 20-year sentences for attempted murder. Although County State’s Attorney Glenn Ivey had asked for the death penalty, he “hailed” the verdict and concluded that county residents have sent a “strong message” that the killing of a law enforcement officer has “serious consequences.”

I am pleased that Billett, a miscreant, will likely never walk the streets again, yet this case raises many concerns that I have about the pursuit of justice. After reading the article, it became evident that Gaughan’s family was reluctant to seek the death penalty because of the insurmountable pain of having to endure lengthy appeals processes. Several officers were disappointed with the decision to drop the death penalty, but they likewise were concerned about an excessive trial coupled with years of appeals.
I totally respect the decision of Gaughan’s family not to pursue the death penalty. They are more qualified than I to determine the fate of Billett in a court. Yet, I have several objections to Mr. Ivey and others who assessed that this verdict sends a “strong message.” Prince George’s County has more homicides than any other county in the state of Maryland, but when is the last time that a criminal was sentenced to death? There are lengthy and costly appeals processes and this is because of ultraliberal judges and judicial activism. As a result, it becomes burdensome for the victim’s family members to seek the death penalty. Conversely, this may be favorable news for those convicted of murder, as a life sentence seems to be the maximum penalty, but rarely imposed.

Furthermore, the Laurel Leader also reported that Circuit Court Judge Jackson insinuated that if Billett had allowed Gaughan to “arrest him rather than run, they may have gotten along” (how often does this happen?) and that they “probably would have made each other laugh.” This is because both men had an ability to make others laugh, according to the sentencing testimony. Yet, such a diversion is irrelevant, humorless, and diminishes with the disconcerting reality that a courageous officer was abruptly murdered and leaves behind a compassionate wife and loving family.