‘Remember the victims but not with more killing’: Protesters object to death penalty in 10/27 trial

By the time the trial proceedings had ended for the day on June 27, a small group of anti-death penalty advocates had gathered across the street from the federal courthouse in Downtown to advocate against a death sentence for the man who murdered 11 people in the Tree of Life building in 2018.

The scene was hectic, with car honks punctuating every few sentences as Donna Coufal, a member of Congregation Dor Hadash, listened to the names of the victims being read aloud:  Joyce Fienberg, Richard Gottfried, Rose Mallinger, Jerry Rabinowitz, Cecil Rosenthal, David Rosenthal, Bernice Simon, Sylvan Simon, Daniel Stein, Melvin Wax and Irving Younger.

“My heart goes out to all of the families who have lost family members, loved ones in this killing,” Coufal said. “No matter what the verdict is, no matter whether this ends with the death penalty or without the death penalty, I hope that the families of the victims find some peace in the outcome of this trial.”

Coufal was hesitant to attend the protest, she said, as she did not lose family in the shooting, but she considered Rabinowitz, one of the victims, a friend. She joined about 10 protesters, some community members and some members of anti-death penalty organizations, as they held signs reading, “Remember the victims but not with more killing,” “Don’t kill the mentally ill” and “Execution is not the solution.”

Seven of the nine families whose loved ones were murdered during the massacre have expressed support for the death penalty.

Leading the vigil was Abraham Bonowitz, co-founder of the Facebook group “L’chaim! Jews Against the Death Penalty” and executive director of Death Penalty Action, a national organization aiming to abolish the death penalty. 

“We’re here to simply say that executions are unnecessary in order to hold people who’ve done awful things accountable,” he said. “It’s not about the awful things that these people have done. It’s about who we are and whether we’re going to emulate that.”

Sarah Slater spoke on behalf of Rehumanize International, a nonprofit group that advocates against the death penalty.

“When the person who was killed is innocent, it’s easy to oppose their killing. When someone is guilty, it’s a lot harder,” she said. “But all of us here believe that even though it’s incontrovertible that the murderer did indeed murder all of our community members, we still believe that we as a community should be able to show him mercy — mercy that he did not extend to his victims.”

Bonowitz published an opinion piece in the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review on June 25 in which he argued that while the Torah does allow the death penalty, Judaism is not based in a literal interpretation of scripture. He reiterated this point during the vigil.

“Jewish law is based on the current rabbinic interpretation, which for 2,000 years has said, ‘Yes, the death penalty exists, but it is not for man to use it,’” he said. “‘Justice is mine, sayeth the Lord, and I will avenge.’ That’s what God says, and that’s what we would like to happen, is for God to deal with this when this shooter eventually dies. But we don’t have to kill him for that to happen.”

Earlier on June 27, Rabbi Danny Schiff, the Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh’s community scholar, held a news conference clarifying that Jewish law allows the death penalty in extreme cases. 

“The death penalty should be a possibility for those particular moments when society is confronted with an example of ultimate evil, but it shouldn’t be something that is used with any frequency,” Schiff said. “The spirit of Jewish law says that the death penalty should, on the one hand, be something that is available, and yet on the other hand, be something that is exceedingly unusual.”

Schiff also wrote an opinion piece May 10 in the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle titled “Judaism does not reject the death penalty,” referencing the execution of Adolf  Eichman, one of the major organizers behind the Holocaust.

“When the state of Israel executed Adolf Eichmann in May 1962, the rabbis did not object,” Schiff wrote. “Those versed in the sources did not claim that the execution was inconsistent with Jewish law. When Eichmann’s executioner, Shalom Nagar, stated that he ‘was involved in the great mitzvah of wiping out Amalek,’ nobody declared his act to be a transgression of Judaism.”

In both Bonowitz’s opinion piece and his speech at the vigil, he warned that execution could make a martyr out of the shooter, bringing even more publicity to him and taking attention away from the victims.

“This racist, antisemitic terrorist — I don’t even use his name, he’s a racist, antisemitic terrorist — is going to die in prison. He already has a death sentence,” Bonowitz said. “He’s going to die in prison. Throw away the key, forget his name and never have to have it come up.”

Bonowitz also argued that the process of getting an execution is lengthy and reopens wounds for the families and loved ones.

“When there’s a death sentence, you’re stuck waiting for execution that may or may not happen decades from now,” he said. “When there’s not a death sentence, the healing process can begin. We will never get our loved ones back. There’s always going to be that empty chair at the table.”

Seven of the nine families of those murdered in the Oct. 27, 2018, massacre said they support the death penalty for the shooter in a November 2022 letter to the editor in the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle. “Please don’t tell us how we should feel, what is best for us, what will comfort us and what will bring closure for the victims’ families. You can not and will not speak for us,” the families wrote. “His crimes deserve the death penalty.” 

Related story: Resources are available to ease trauma during synagogue shooting trial.

This story is part of ongoing coverage of the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial by the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle and the Pittsburgh Union Progress in a collaboration supported by funding from the Pittsburgh Media Partnership.