House resolution urges Wolf to reverse death penalty moratorium |

House resolution urges Wolf to reverse death penalty moratorium

Brad Bumsted | Trib Total Media
Tricia Wertz, widow of a slain Reading police officer, wants her husband's killer executed. She lends her support to a rally on March 4, 2015, opposing Gov. Tom Wolf's decision to grant reprieves to convicted killers until a legislative study of the issue can be completed.
Brad Bumsted | Trib Total Media
Lawmakers, district attorneys and victims' families rallied at the Capitol on Wednesday, March 4, 2015, against Gov. Tom Wolf's suspension of Pennsylvania's death penalty.

HARRISBURG — Tricia Wertz lost her husband to a gunman’s bullet in 2006.

“I hope to see Scott’s killer put to death in my lifetime,” said Wertz, 44, a mother of two from Reading.

She joined lawmakers, district attorneys and other victims’ families on Wednesday to back a House resolution urging Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf to reverse his recent suspension of Pennsylvania’s death penalty.

Cletus Rivera is on death row, convicted of killing Scott Wertz, a plainclothes Reading police officer shot while responding to a convenience store fight.

The state Supreme Court agreed to hear a challenge to Wolf’s moratorium on executing 186 murderers on death row, filed by Philadelphia District Attorney Seth Williams, though it’s not clear when the court will hear the case. Dauphin County District Attorney Ed Marsico said other prosecutors would file to support Williams’ action, probably next week.

“The governor is standing with some of the worst criminals in Pennsylvania and against their victims,” said Rep. Mike Vereb, R-Montgomery County, the resolution’s sponsor. Because it is a resolution and not a law, “Sure, the governor can ignore it,” Vereb said.

Wolf’s spokesman Jeffrey Sheridan said Wolf’s decision “is in no way an expression of sympathy for the guilty on death row, all of whom have been convicted of committing heinous crimes and all of whom must be held to account.” He said the governor appreciates the work of victim advocates and sympathizes with victims and their families.

But Vereb said passage of the resolution would assure victims’ families that “at least 102 members are supporting you” — the number of votes needed to pass a bill in the 203-member House.

The House Judiciary Committee will hear from both sides of the issue March 26 in Philadelphia.

Marsico said he and other death penalty supporters believe it requires a state law to block executions.

Pennsylvania has executed only three inmates since restoring the death penalty in 1976 and again in 1999. All three voluntarily stopped appeals.

Wolf announced the executive action after granting a reprieve to inmate Terrence Williams, who is on death row for the 1984 beating death of a man in Philadelphia. Wolf said the state’s death penalty system is error-prone and expensive. He plans to issue reprieves while a legislative panel studies the issue.

Wertz said she supported Wolf for governor, though she did not vote because she was away from home. She would vote for him again, she said, because she likes his stance on other issues such as education.

Brad Bumsted is Trib Total Media’s state Capitol reporter. Reach him at 717-787-1405 or [email protected]. The Associated Press contributed.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.