This is an article about the Petit family murder trial and the lead prosecutor, Michael Dearington and public defender Thomas Ulmann the latter representing co-defendant Steven Hayes both having squared off once before on another triple murder death penalty case in Connecticut;
Ulmann it turns out is a notoriously high profile anti-death penalty activist - which in my opinion is a major conflict in this case and should have required him to recuse himself or be recused, based on the fact that he is inherently against the very sentencing that is being sought by the state for his client's alleged participation in the Petit family sexual assault kidnapping, assault larceny arsdon and murder case. It's like saying I am against incarceration for anyone no matter what law they have broken yet then preparing what is supposed to be an impartial defense for a man accused of crimes that will lead to incarceration if he is found guilty. How can we believe this attorney's objectivity concerning his clients guilt or innocence when we know that he is on the record as being agsisnst prison sentences, It is imposssible for this man to have a clear head concerning the guilt of his client and as such every legla motion he makes will therfore be suspect as it is likely going to be mere manipulation of the court ie jury/judge in whatever fashion he deems neccesary to 'save this mans life" Like I said conflict of interest and impossible impartiality.
Ulmann's anti death penalty agenda has already been injected into the pre-trial proceedings where the issues should center around his defendents plea which incidenbtly Mr Hayes attempted to change to guilty only to be undone by his own attorneys who tried first to have thier client declared incompetent for trying to plead guilty and accept accountability--- and when that didnt work ie a court shrink claimed hayes was competent) They set about the task of earnestly wearing Mr Hayes down until he acquiesed to thier insistance that he say he wasnt guilty, just so they could" save his life" at the cost of millions of dollars to the state and a heaping of grief and pain onto the loved ones of the victims-jennifer hayley and michaela Petit.
who after all Mr hayes was accused of kidnapping raping and murdering-despite the full cooperation of Mrs Petit who valiently tried to save her daughters lives throughout the ordeal even providing hayes with 15000,00 dollars in cash when hed only asked for 10,000 in exchange for her familys life. A promise hed had no intention of keeping as he turned on Jennifer Petit literally the moment they returned from the bank together-first raping then strangling her. Then with the help of the co-defendent hjosh komisaraerejevky they poured gasoline on the Mrs Hawke Petits body and then the girls who were still alive and terrified tied to thier beds as they were drenched with gasoline in preparation to be burned alive in hopes of destroying witnesses and dna evidence.
Now while It is clear that Mr Ulmann seems to fancy himself some kind of modern day crusader for our states very worst murderers and rapists right to live, this life long crusade is in direct conflict with his responsibilities as head public defender for the state of Connecticut.
It has been made clear that both Ullmann and Jeremiah Donovan , the other Petit crime public defender for co defendent number two, both plan on using anti death penalty sentiment as the main focus of thier defense; they have little else; both of their clients were caught red handed as it were, fleeing the murder scene in the victims family car, not to mention both men confessed in varying degrees of detail to The Cheshire Police, shortly after thier arrests.
Oddly enough, the two murder cases discusssed in the linked article happened over a decade apart and yet they are the only two cases that prosecutor Michael Dearington saw fit to pursue the death penalty for, throughout his 20 year career as a Connecticut lead prosecutor. This only proves to me that Dearington is a steady and fair minded prosecutor who obviously pursues capital punishment sparingly and with great aforethought and consideration as well it should be-this is a grave matter.
He clearly felt that the Petit family crimes pre medidated kidnapping and sexual assaults including that of an 11 yr old child, aggravated assault with a baseball bat, extortion, larceny and multiple murder-- had enough aggravating circumstances to warrant our states rare pursuit of a death peanlty sentence.