By Mensah M. Dean
The Philadelphia Daily News
PHILADELPHIA — STARTING THIS morning, a life-or-death matter will be the subject of conversation in Courtroom 304 of the Philadelphia Criminal Justice Center.
It has come to this for John “Jordan” Lewis because in less than 2 1/2 hours yesterday, a jury of his peers had lunch while deciding that he was guilty of first-degree murder for gunning down a Philadelphia police officer during a doughnut-shop holdup two years ago.
The swiftness of the verdict may not be a good sign for the 23-year-old defendant. The jury of eight women and four men could have found him guilty of second-degree murder, sparing his life and sending him to prison with no access to parole.
Instead, the verdict that the panel rendered means that Lewis’ fate is still hanging in the balance.
During the trial’s penalty phase, which was to get started after 9:30 a.m., the two prosecutors will try to convince the jurors to sentence Lewis to death, and Lewis’ two defense attorneys will argue that he should receive life in prison with no parole.
Under state law, if at least one of 10 aggravating circumstances listed in the law and none of the eight mitigating factors are found to be present, the verdict must be death.
Aggravating circumstances include killing a law-enforcement officer and a significant prior criminal record. Among mitigating factors is evidence of severe child abuse.
Lewis, who pleaded guilty last week to general murder and six counts of armed robbery, appeared momentarily frozen after the verdict was read, and had to be told to sit down by one of his attorneys.
There were muffled sounds of celebration from some of the civilian and police supporters of Officer Chuck Cassidy’s family, who packed the courtroom during five days of testimony and yesterday’s closing arguments.
Cassidy, a 25-year veteran and well-liked figure in the Department’s crime-ridden 35th District, lost his life when he stopped to check on a West Oak Lane Dun-kin’ Donuts the morning of Oct. 31, 2007. The shop had been robbed a month earlier by a gunman who would later be identified as Lewis.
When Cassidy, 54, approached the front door, he spotted a robbery in progress, opened the door, drew his gun and was shot in the head by Lewis. It all happened in a matter of seconds.
The Northeast Philadelphia husband and father of three died the next day.
The jury saw surveillance video of the murder on Monday in court and again yesterday while deliberating.
During closing arguments yesterday, Michael Coard, Lewis’ lead defense attorney, was effusive in praising the late officer as a hero, but he still insisted that his client was no first-degree murderer.
Coard told the jurors that 99 percent of the prosecution’s case had been designed to draw on their sympathy for the slain officer and had nothing to do with whether Lewis had committed first- or second-degree murder.
The 40-plus prosecution witnesses, the display of Cassidy’s bloodied badge and blue uniform shirt, and his bulletproof vest were beside the point, Coard stressed.
He asserted that Lewis had committed second-degree murder because in the few seconds that it took for him to turn and shoot Cassidy, he could not have acted in a “willful, deliberate and premeditated,” fashion, which he said is required for first-degree murder to have been committed.
“We acknowledge that this is a sad, horrific case, but that sadness cannot carry the day,” he said.
Instead, Coard suggested that the slaying had been “a horrific and criminal, panicky reaction at the end of a robbery.”
Assistant District Attorney Edward Cameron told the jury that the trial revealed Cassidy’s virtue versus Lewis’ vice.
He described Lewis as a man who was too lazy and greedy to get a job, so he became a robber and then a murderer.
Cameron showed the jurors the bullet fragments that ripped into the officer’s forehead and brain, and the 9 mm Hi-Point handgun from which Lewis fired them.
“This is not ‘CSI’ or ‘Law & Order,’ ” he said, displaying the murder weapon. “A person is dead. Somebody took this gun and fired it at a person.”
Cameron told the jury that the intent to kill can be formed in a fraction of a second. And although Lewis did not say he had intended to kill Cassidy, the jurors could infer that he meant to kill by his actions, Cameron said.
Cassidy, he said, hesitated to shoot because there were customers and employees in the shop.
“This defendant didn’t hesitate when he decided to shoot. Don’t you hesitate when you decide his intent,” he implored the jury. “Actions speak louder than words.
“His actions tell you about the cold, calculating person that is sitting here.”
Copyright 2009 Philadelphia Newspapers, LLC