Give the idiot a fair trial then hang him!

 

By: Joseph Walther

 

There’s a capital murder trial going on in Wilmington, Delaware. The State is trying 36-year-old James E. Cooke with the 2005 rape and murder of Lindsey Bonistall, a 20-year-old University of Delaware Student. The evidence against Cooke is voluminous and horrific. It shows that before leaving her apartment, he poured bleach over her body to wash away evidence, moved the body from the bedroom, placing it in the bathroom tub, tossed in her clothes and guitar, and set the works on fire.

 

            Two eyewitnesses, who live in the same apartment building as Bonistall did, positively identified him as the one who broke into each of their apartments, stealing personal items, including a credit card of one of the victims. He also told that victim to take her clothes off, but her screams scared him off. A picture taken from a bank ATM showed Cooke using the stolen credit card. Later, the same night, he raped and murdered Lindsey, inside her apartment.

 

            DNA samples taken from her body did not match samples taken from eight “people of interest;” but they did match DNA taken from James Cooke. The results were unambiguous. The likelihood of Cooke’s DNA sample coming from another black person—Cooke is black—is 1 in 676 quintillion. That’s 676 followed by 18-zeros! The DNA analyst later reduced the chances to 1 in 64-billion because the samples beneath Lindsey’s fingernails matched both, her’s and Cooke’s.

 

            So, why haven’t they given this scumbag a lethal injection already? Many of the Journal’s readers want to know. Concisely, the answer is that he has Sixth Amendment rights: a speedy trial, confronting the witnesses against him, subpoena power to gather evidence on his own behalf, and the right to effective legal counsel. Damn! That pesky Constitution always seems to get in the way of righteousness. Nevertheless, it brings me to my main point.

 

            The News Journal carries a daily account of the trial. In addition, the editors post it to the paper’s website at www.delawareonline.com, which, in turn, permits readers to post their opinions on the matter. Herein we find the crux of the dilemma. I rarely participate in the forums. Just click on the link above, click on any news item, and read the comments. You’ll only have to read a couple of them to understand why. I did comment on the Cooke trial, though, because I know one of the public defenders involved.

 

            Most of the opinions support killing the bum as painfully as possible; bringing him back to life, and killing him over again for good measure. They’re advocating the same fate for his defense lawyers. They’re none too happy with the trial judge, either. The consensus is that the defense team and trial judge have turned the proceedings into a circus, subjecting the Bonistall family to unadulterated grief. It all makes me wonder if any of the respondents have ever read the Sixth Amendment.

 

            First, James Cooke has seriously disrupted the trial each day with his rants of innocence. Some people seem to think that his lawyers have put him up to it. Second, because the trial judge refuses to bar Cooke from the courtroom permanently, the same people believe that he’s an old liberal softie, pampering a poor misguided youth. Third, several people think the defense lawyers are slime balls for defending Cooke. Of course, they’re wrong on all counts.

 

            I’ve seen judges lodge disciplinary complaints against trial lawyers—at times resulting in severe disciplinary action, including disbarment—for far less than disrupting a trial, especially a capital murder trial. Criminal defendants have a Sixth Amendment right to confront all witnesses against them via their presence in the courtroom. While continuous disruptions by defendants tend to waive this right, at least in terms of their presence within the courtroom during the trail, judges run the risk of appellate reversals or remands by baring defendants from the room. So, they do so only as a last resort.

 

            Finally, excluding any conflicts of interest, public defenders cannot refuse to represent an indigent defendant. They don’t get to beg off because they think a defendant is some stinking, lowlife scumbag. They can’t refuse to defend an accused, even if they believe they can’t win the case. A defense lawyer’s job is not to get someone “off.” It’s to make sure that the State proves its case beyond a reasonable doubt, in accordance with long-established rules of evidence.

 

            James E. Cooke is not crazy. He’s probably not even mentally ill. He’s possibly on the short end of the IQ scale, somewhere between a 90 and 95. He’s a classic sociopathic narcissist, only mucho stupido. The DNA evidence, alone, gives the jury ample justification to convict him. Even though he’s too intellectually unremarkable to realize it, his lawyers aren’t. Given this fact, the least he will receive is a life sentence with no chance of parole.

 

            I realize that this has devastated the Bonistall family. Had it been my child, I’d be a raging lunatic. The nature of the crime is so repulsive that it enrages the emotions of even the clinically rational. So, it’s easy for me to understand the impetus for what people are posting to the forum. Just his picture triggers MY gag reflex.

 

            However, permitting rage-driven hatred to intensify already acute tunnel vision is not going to accomplish anything. Thankfully, the trial judge, prosecutors, and defense lawyers know how to remain self-controlled. Having a verdict overturned or remanded on appeal because of some stupid, impulsive legal mistake would constitute an unforgivable and acutely demoralizing slap in the Bonistall family face.

 

            The trial will be over in a few more days. The posts will surely start all over again if Cooke doesn’t receive the death penalty. It will make for some interesting reading, but it will be fodder for another column. I can’t wait! In the meantime, I’ll be back again next week. Stay safe.

 

Joseph Walther is a freelance writer and publisher of The True Facts. Copyright laws apply to all material on this site. Send your comments. Just click here.