Editorial: Wideman pardon part of painful justice reform | TribLIVE.com
Editorials

Editorial: Wideman pardon part of painful justice reform

1366419_web1_web_jail

Forty-four years would have seemed like a lifetime to a 24-year-old man in 1975.

Robert Wideman, now 68, was just 24 when charged with second-degree murder. He was convicted the next year and sent to prison for life.

Nicola Morena was 24 back in 1975, too.

Morena was the man who died in the robbery in the Pittsburgh neighborhood of Overbrook. Wideman didn’t shoot him, but he was one of the three men who participated in the crime.

Wideman’s sentence was commuted by Gov. Tom Wolf on Tuesday. After 44 years, Wideman will get to come home to his family (after a year in a halfway house).

He comes home over the objections of Morena’s family. He comes home over the objections of Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen Zappala Jr. Both opposed his bid for commutation with the Pennsylvania Board of Pardons, which voted in May to release Wideman.

Morena’s family doesn’t get him back.

The criminal justice system is a complicated machine because none of the parts are just pulleys and gears. They are people and pain, and being fair to one person can feel like being cruel to someone else.

At the board’s hearing, there was just one witness. Allegheny County Judge Jeffrey Manning pushed to end Wideman’s sentence. He knows exactly how long has passed since Morena’s death, because in 1976, he was the assistant district attorney who prosecuted him.

Under Pennsylvania law, second-degree murder is the charge you receive for a death that occurs in the commission of another crime. You might not have pulled the trigger. You might not have intended for anyone to die. But you did knowingly commit a crime, and this is how you are held to account.

Manning opposes that law.

“Life without parole is an inappropriate sentence for someone who did not cause the death of another person,” he told the Tribune-Review in May.

A victim’s family would no doubt disagree.

That painful, imperfect criminal justice system is being reformed at different levels, but as it moves from past problems to new processes, it’s important to remember that it will always be imperfect and it will always be painful.

We can try to mitigate places where it has been unfair, and we can try to improve it — to make people safer, to give victims and their families a voice, to protect rights and to prevent the system itself from turning a one-time mistake into a criminal career.

Still, at the end of the day, when you are dealing with a murder, there will always be someone who doesn’t get to come home.

And for that family, no amount of remorse or rehabilitation may ever restore what they lost. That is understandable.

But 44 years might be justice, even if it’s not perfect.

Categories: Opinion | Editorials
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com 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.