Court too easy toward murderer

To the editor: 

A particular article in the Star Tribune, dated Aug. 5, entitled “Craigslist Killer” exhibits where we are headed within our justice system. The article said Steven E. Lewis was sentenced to only 16 years before being eligible for parole, for luring, robbing and shooting a stranger in the head.

I have a few questions: Why only 16 years? As I read on, the “killer” had 12 previous misdemeanors, a gross misdemeanor and, get this, seven, yes, 7, felony convictions. It went on to say “he was sorry for his actions.” Lewis, 27 years old, was on parole during this crime. The young man he murdered was only 19 years of age. District Judge Margaret Marrinan was quoted saying at the sentencing; “Mr. Lewis you’ve been given another chance because you stand here alive. Take that chance.” You are given another change because you stand here alive? What?

People everywhere, including the justice system, wonder why the public is disgusted with the system, which is seemingly giving up and at some points even giving in to the criminals.

One more interesting fact, if I dare say, Mohammad was Lewis’s lawyer’s name. In years past, this would have never been brought to the forefront, but with the most recent occurrences, wow.

What is the norm for trying a case such as this? I know in some states it is the death penalty. How can we the public be so naive as to elect judges such as this story portrays?

Yes, I am very angry at the liberal, soft, common senseless state of mind that excuses crimes such as these with no justice for the victim. I feel everyone should be more aware of the consistent incompetent justice system. Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter.

Kevin Hall, Albany