Rob McKenna: Life in prison might be better than death penalty for Christopher Monfort

The sentencing phase in the case of cop-killer Christopher Monfort continues and jurors are considering if the man found guilty of murdering a Seattle police officer should get the death penalty.

For some, the appropriate sentence is clear, but as KIRO Radio political analyst and former Washington State Attorney General Rob McKenna points out, the death penalty is often more complicated than people realize.

“It becomes a much more complex matter than you would have when you have a typical murder case when the death penalty is on the table,” McKenna told KIRO Radio’s Dave Ross.

Related: Monfort found guilty of murder

In June, Monfort was found guilty of the 2009 murder of Seattle police officer Timothy Brenton. Ross noted that the Monfort case &#8212 a case that the accused pleaded guilty &#8212 cost $7 million and still took years to conclude. Ross wondered if there was a cheaper way in such cases.

“There really isn’t when it comes to a death penalty case,” McKenna said. “We’ve also seen extraordinary costs in the case of the Carnation massacre … in both those cases, Carnation and Monfort, you have a death penalty case where prosecutors and the defense lawyers are going through excruciating lengths to satisfy the requirements for imposing the death penalty because every death penalty verdict goes on appeal, frequently all the way to the United States Supreme Court.”

Those appeals cost more money and time. It’s much more efficient to spend time and money on a case initially.

McKenna pointed out that some lawyers even prefer a sentence of life without parole because it ends up being cheaper. But that’s not the only reason.

“I think a better argument than money is that you can achieve closure for the victims and families much sooner than you do in a case when appeals drag on for 20 years,” McKenna said.