Frein seeks to block death penalty; Also suppression of statements

Posted 8/21/12

MILFORD, PA — Accused cop-killer Eric Frein appeared in the Pike County Courthouse on April 20, and his lawyer William Ruzzo made two motions regarding significant issues in the trial.

The …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Frein seeks to block death penalty; Also suppression of statements

Posted

MILFORD, PA — Accused cop-killer Eric Frein appeared in the Pike County Courthouse on April 20, and his lawyer William Ruzzo made two motions regarding significant issues in the trial.

The first concerned the death penalty. Pike County District Attorney Ray Tonkin has said that he will seek the death penalty against Frein, who is accused of ambushing two police officers in September 2014, and killing Corporal Bryon Dickson and seriously wounding Trooper Alex Douglas.

Ruzzo said to Judge Gregory Chelak that death sentences were being increasingly overturned in cases around the country, and Ruzzo argued that Chelak’s court had the authority to determine that the death penalty is not constitutional because it is cruel and unusual punishment.

Chelak said he would not immediately decide the issue, and noted that issues of constitutionality are generally left to the Supreme Court to determine.

Tonkin reiterated his position that under current law, the death penalty is appropriate because Frein is accused of killing a police officer while that officer was on duty.

The other motion concerned statements Frein made to officials when he was captured at the end of a 48-day manhunt.

Ruzzo said that when he was captured officers did not inform Frein that his parents had hired Ruzzo to serve as his attorney; therefore, any statements Frien made to officers at the time should not be used as evidence and should be suppressed.

The judge said he was going to hear the motion regarding those statements in closed court. Other motions to be determined at a later date involve whether Frein will be permitted to use an insanity defense and whether there should be a change of venue in the case.

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here