The accused killer of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim, Elias Rodriguez, may be facing the ultimate penalty. On Thursday, U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, Jeanine Pirro, indicated that the Department of Justice may seek the death penalty for Rodriguez.
U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Jeanine Pirro announced that the Justice Department was considering the death penalty for Elias Rodriguez, who was indicted on several counts related to the deaths of Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim.
"This office will leave no stone unturned in its effort to bring justice to the innocent victims of Elias Rodriguez," Pirro said in a DOJ release.
During a news conference on Thursday, Pirro said that Rodriguez's actions against Milgrim were particularly cruel, but declined to give details, saying it would be revealed during the trial.
Moral issues surrounding the death penalty aside, there are practical difficulties with seeking the ultimate penalty; issues surrounding endless appeals, legal actions, questions, and challenges that can drag on for decades. A death row inmate may well die of old age before being executed, which begs the question as to whether it would be a better deal for the taxpayers to simply sentence someone like Elias Rodriguez to a life sentence for each victim, without the possibility of parole.
Then again, this was a particularly hateful crime; the targeting of two innocent young people because of their presumed ties to Israel. What's more, co-workers of the pair described them in glowing terms:
Their burgeoning relationship was well-known at the embassy, where they met, an Israeli official told CNN. They would often be seen having lunch together.
“It was the cutest love story,” the official said, adding it was “like a poster for a Netflix rom-com.”
These are the people Elias Rodriguez targeted for no reason that would make sense to a sane person. So, the death penalty should certainly be part of the discussion when sentencing rolls around - as should just a simple, irrevocable life sentence.
In either case, a convicted killer would never trouble the law-abiding public again.
Read More: New: DC Shooter's Sick and Evil Manifesto, Chat Logs Revealed
We should note that the Constitution appears to specifically allow for the death penalty, in the Fifth Amendment (see highlighted portion):
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
The Fifth Amendment, then, would indicate that, with due process of law, a person may be deprived of life, liberty, or property.
Stay tuned. We will be bringing you updates as this legal process unfolds.
Editor’s Note: Every single day, here at RedState, we will stand up and FIGHT, FIGHT, FIGHT against the radical left and deliver the conservative reporting our readers deserve.
Help us continue to tell the truth about the Trump administration and its successes. Join RedState VIP and use promo code FIGHT to get 60% off your membership.