Kopp belonged in the company of the radical Army of God— “the army of lunatics”—and Marusak likened him to Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. “He is nothing more than a dangerous sociopath, plain and simple.” He countered Barket’s argument at trial that Kopp had confessed to shooting Bart Slepian simply out of a desire to tell the truth. No: Kopp merely saw the mounting evidence against him and tried to cut his losses. “That’s why he confessed, not out of any sense of duty or honesty or a Christian ethic.” Kopp believed himself to be “somehow morally, intellectually, religiously superior to all of us. In his own eyes, Judge, this defendant has cast himself—and I emphasize, in his own eyes—as God’s avenging protector of the unborn. From the Spanish Inquisition to the Twin Towers disaster, religious zealots have rained terror on their victims. He’s no different. He will never be open to rehabilitation. He’s manipulated and lied his entire life.”
Marusak quoted from conversations between Kopp and Loretta Marra that the FBI had recorded—“and we know how close Ms. Marra and the defendant are,” he added. Marra had told Kopp about the love of his supporters back in the United States. “Let them love me with cash,” Kopp had said. “Let them love me with cash,” Marusak repeated. “That’s part of the Catholic religion, isn’t it? Part of Christianity? Love your neighbor. Give me money. Let them love me with cash.”
Jim Kopp sat in his chair, his blood boiling. Marusak, a Catholic, was attacking him personally, but worse than that was attacking his faith, his Catholicism. That, to Kopp, was beyond the pale. Marusak next appealed for a stiff sentence on behalf of Bart Slepian’s widow, who was seated in the gallery. He spoke of Lynne’s courage, the impact the murder had on her sons. And he spoke of Bart, read testimonials about his work ethic as a physician and as a father.
He quoted from a letter by Dr. Carole Lieberman, who had gone to school with Bart in Belgium. “His faith and his religion did not counsel him against abortion. And although, personally, I don’t think he would have wished that in his own family, he recognized and respected the law that allowed a woman to make that choice… And I understand very well the moral opposition to abortion. But this is not about abortion. This is about murder. A man who would murder such a man as Bart deserves the harshest sentence allowable by law.”
Marusak returned once more to Lynne. Mother’s Day, he said, was in two days. “By God, this woman, Mrs. Slepian, if there ever was a good mother, she’s it.” He read a letter to the judge from Lynne:
I’m speaking on behalf of our four children: Andrew, age 20; Brian, age 18; Michael, age 15; Philip, age 12. Overnight they went from average everyday boys to the objects of every media source in the country. Philip was only seven when his dad died. I think he’s probably been affected the most, because there is just so much that he can’t remember about his dad. My sons are angry, and so am I. But there is no way to bring my husband and their father back to us. He was such a proud man, and a very private person. All this attention would have made him so uncomfortable. The only thing that would make things a bit better would be to ensure that Mr. Kopp never sees the light of day again. He is an evil man and does not deserve to have his life back again.
Marusak couldn’t resist taking one more swipe at Kopp’s interpretation of Catholicism: “This defendant alleges he is motivated by his Christian beliefs. I’m reminded—I don’t know if you have seen Godfather II, where Al Pacino plays the role of the Godfather. And he’s at his son’s baptism and he goes through the Catholic prayer where he’s announcing how he rejects Satan and evil. And while he’s doing all of that, his henchmen are killing the five other Mafia family guys. So out of his mouth is this profession of Catholic belief, when his actions are that of nothing more than an assassin. If that’s being a hero, well then, so be it.”
Now it was Bruce Barket’s turn. He did not invoke the intentto-wound argument. He had bigger fish to fry: morality, religion, the rule of law, and how history shall judge everyone in the long run. But first he defended Kopp’s character, tried to take some of the sting out of Marusak’s scathing attack. “You listened to Mr. Marusak paint Jim as a cowardly assassin. I have gotten to know Mr. Kopp over the last year or so and that’s simply not true. He is not a sociopath. He is calm. He is rational. He is sane. I know that Jim Kopp is intelligent. He is caring, generous. He is slow to anger, quick to forgive, very modest, deeply spiritual. He’s a prayerful man with a humble heart. He is also an honest man, scrupulously honest. Jim Kopp is a good man… If Jim wanted to continue to fool people, he had an opportunity to do that. He had the means to do that. And there is a substantial chance that we wouldn’t be here today at his sentence. He might very well have been acquitted.”
Barket turned to abortion. “Jim has a set of beliefs that are not inconsistent with a large majority of people in this country. He believes that abortion is intrinsically evil. The answer why Jim Kopp is here, I think, comes from a society that encourages mothers to bring their unborn children to doctors not for care, but to be slaughtered in horrific and unimaginable ways.”
Barket next turned to the argument that shooting Slepian was justified. The simple syllogism cannot be refuted, he said: all innocent life is worthy of protection. Unborn children are innocent life. Therefore unborn children are worthy of protection. And the Catholic Church supports force, too, even deadly force, to protect others, contrary to what Marusak had said. Barket attacked the sanctity of the rule of law. “Our Supreme Court, as honorable as it is, also once indicated that slavery was a choice. They said African-Americans are nonpersons. They have said that unborn children were not children and it’s OK to kill them.”
The law had been wrong on slavery, segregation and it was wrong once more, on abortion. “The fact the Supreme Court has declared abortion to be legal does not answer its morality. Abortion is immoral. It’s an intrinsic evil. Jim Kopp is a hero. And today I think he will become a martyr.” Barket said he was reminded of the famous abolitionist John Brown. Brown had long advocated violence to resolve the great social issue of his day and had once led a band of men in a deadly attack on neighbors who advocated slavery. He had later tried to lead a slave rebellion, and had been hanged for that. “One hundred and forty years later, we see John Brown as a hero. There is a shrine built to him for freeing slaves. The judge in his trial is a historical footnote.”
D’Amico was once again underwhelmed by the presentation. He was not hearing Barket make an argument. He was making a speech, a statement. He’s telling me how I can be a hero, the judge thought. Barket’s approach was not sitting well with him, not at all. What are you talking about, Mr. Barket—I’m supposed to have courage to impose a minimum sentence, thereby sending a message about my moral convictions? Don’t presume what my moral convictions are. Or am I supposed to base my ruling on your convictions?
Barket concluded by saying that Kopp deserved the minimum sentence, “to reflect the complexity of the issues involved” and to vindicate the other victims in this case, “the unborn who are killed by abortions every day.” Finally, he took a swipe at the FBI. At the same time as “hundreds of agents, thousands of work hours and millions of dollars were spent in hunting down, capturing and prosecuting James Kopp, and making America safe for abortionists,” real terrorists, in al-Qaeda, were plotting the 9/11 attacks. “To law enforcement, I would say, stop using your resources to protect abortionists. It is akin to protecting the slave owners. History will not judge you kindly. The fact abortion is legal is not the final word on whether or not what Jim did is moral or immoral. Thank you.”