This is the just breaking news regarding the Petit murder trial against Steven Hayes. It is safe to assume that the delay is somehow related to Steven Hayes's attorney's announcement on Thursday that Hayes had experienced " a seizure like occurrence "on Wednesday evening, which they only would say involved him urinating on himself- no elaborations were given beyond this and no corroborations from the infirmary in the correctional institution where Hayes is currently housed under 24 hour suicide watch which he has had in place since shortly after his arrest and arraignment for the sexual assaults arson and murders of Jennifer Hayley and Michaela Petit.
Despite the expensive 24 hour suicide watch and chronic surveillance of Mr Hayes he managed a suicide attempt that was very near successful several months before the start of his scheduled trial. It seems that Hayes had been stockpiling his daily anti-anxiety and anti-depressant med-along with whatever psycho-tropic medications he'd conned the Department of corrections into giving him for God knows what real or imagined psychiatric conditions he supposedly had.
In any event, even with all of this scrutiny from the Ct. Dept of Correction, Hayes managed to fake swallowing his multiple medications for weeks, and also managed to hide all of those pills somewhere in his cell or on his person, undetected.
As we all know Hayes then proceeded to take all of his pills in one grand gesture of 'get me outta facing the violence and horror that I inflicted upon three innocent human beings including an 11 year old child.
The attempt obviously failed, although Hayes was hospitalized for several days and placed in a medically induced coma, so there must have been a fair amount of drugs in his system. Although,as a addict of many years-(most of his adult life was spent using and pursuing the use of drugs) hayes likely knew what it would take to kill himself, and yet he failed. iT remains to be seen if this was because he really didnt want to die, just wanted an escape and or a visit to the medical ward which is decidely more pleasent than a small cell in solitary, or simply because he made a error in judgement regarding the amounts neccesary.
Once back in his prison cell Hayes now faced even more rigid surveillance including 24 hour lighting in his cell, a necessary precaution should he try another suicide attempt using the darkness of night for a cover. His lawyers complained liberally as was their custom-in fact bitterness has become somewhat of Ullmanns signature as much as Hayes's 'poor me victimizing himself is "- I'm sick- I'm depressed I'm anxious and I don't want to go to court I cant deal with it!"
With all of this being as it is, it is hard to discern fact from manipulative lies and exageration.
We certainly cannot rely on Mr. Hayes's attorneys to provide us with the honest answers: they've crossed the line that involves proffesional integrity and decency, and this not because they chose to defend this man, but rather the manner in which they have carried out this task; underhanded, vituperative personal attacks of victim William Petit, lone survivor of his clients night of sexual assault and murderous rampage . Strategically inserting statements about race, minority's and elitism-hoping it will garner hayes and them support from other places. Much like Johnny Cochran did with his jury nullification in the Simpson Trial. But even Cochran in his sleazy tactics, did not attack the victims of the crimes. At one point Ullmann went so far in his rabidness that he claimed to the court that a recent motion by the prosecution "makes me sick"-This was in reference to prosecutor Michael Dearingtons request for both men to be tried together-something that is certainly not unheard of in the criminal justice system. But when that was shown to be not practical nor fair for the defendants as the men were plotting antagonistic defenses naturally laying the worst of the crimes blame at each others feet, a suggestion of two simultaneous trials was put forth by the Prosecutor-This, only in an attempt to spare the victim William Petit from dragging out painful testimony as the sole witness to the crimes, as well as both familys of the victims who will be forced to sit through two very long, painful trial preparations and the proceedings themselves. Twice.
No sooner did this suggestion arise and the logistics of such a thing explored, when Ullmann began an ugly and highly personalized public crusade against Dr Petit and his family, citing that the court would never consider such a thing if the victims were black or Hispanic, and the fact that Bill Petit was Doctor in an "affluent town", (Cheshire is in fact mixed mostly middle class) well say no more..he claimed that the mere fact that it was being considered quote "made him sick" Wow, bit over the top even for you- dont you think Ullmann?
This is a tiresome and classless tact that this guy has wielded one too many times and by now, he's used it up-- It is reminiscent of the famous old 'blame the rape victim' technique, once widely utilized by sleazy defense attorneys all over this country, until our legal/civil rights activists caught up with it. Not that it's extinct in our courts today - far from it: It's just generally no longer used in such overt fashion - not so subtle innuendo suffices in plenty of cases, just enough to dishonor and discredit the victim in both rape and domestic/partner assault cases. Anytime a woman knows the man that assaulted her, creates an immediate change in how it is viewed by prosecutors police and even some judges.
The crimes and the accompanying charges are dropped down insofar as level of importance often due to the stubborn male notion that the crimes are automatically "suspect" because the victim and defendent knew eachother. Instead of believing the victim and her experience, as prosecutors typically would reflexively in any "stranger crime", due to their own innate prejudices, far too many states attorneys will immediately qualify serious assault crimes, as a " he said she said" scenario, with the attitude of "well the truth is probably somewhere in the middle of what the victim, and the assailant claim happened.
In situations involving the evolved- women- batterer, extending this undeserved "judicial meeting in the middle" is akin to giving credence to a sociopath rapist or mass murderer.
And indeed, the dropped and nolled assault charges, the plea bargained charges that result in serious felonies becoming nothing misdemeanors, involving no prison time, these are so often the court's history behind many a murdered woman killed by some guy she just broke up with, or a husband she just separated with or divorced - who swore that they'd decide when it was over - not her.
The Bottomline is this; the kind of tactic Attorney Ullmann has been using is vile- he is attempting to encourage and utilize an ugly diviseness which has no place in a criminal case about the murder and rape of a mother within earshot of her children and the kidnapping torture and sexual assaults of two girls, who were ultimately set on fire alive while tied to thier own beds.
Not that it is at all pertinent to this case, but as an aside the irony is that William Petit is in fact an extremely down to earth every-man kind of person who bears no resemblance to this " affluent Doctor with a life reeking of privilege." No boat no country clubs no showiness, lots of charity and community work in relatively modest house with simple furnishings.
The attacks on Petit and accusations of special treatment show a desperate and unethical Attorney, seemingly clutching at anything at all, no matter how immoral, unprofessional and worst of all promotional of the very same kind of hate- against a perceived privileged lifestyle that by its unnattainability deserves to be torn down and destroyed, by men like Mr Hayes, and apparently, Mr Ullmann as well.