Judge rules that Petit murder Gag order will stay in place

Another "blow" to Thomas Ullmann and Company.
This is what happens when a defense attorney perpetually stomps his feet at every turn in a criminal case: It becomes a bit like " the boy who cried wolf". No one is inclined to listen to him, and a good intelligent judge will certainly not relent to his unreasonable and clearly personalized motions and demands.

The question is, is this guy and his cohort ever going to actually present a defense, or is the plan merely to use stalling tactics and victim-baiting( in a transparent effort to muzzle the lone survivor of these crimes Or the latest nonsense - threats to break any dictum that
that the court imposes that he finds inconvenient or frustrates his ego. The latter a reference to Ullmann recent proclamations that he will be "forced" to break the court imposed gag order and "hold his OWN press conferences" in summation to give tit for tat to Dr Petit, a man who has been if anything, reserved and low key with the media, certainly much more so than most other men in his position would be in these circumstances.

The irony here is that Ullmann has had zero qualms talking about what he feels about the death penalty in the past and this, as it directly affects this case: I vividly recall reading several caustic remarks that Ullmann made to the press in the months following these murders concerning the"irony"of the state of Connecticut seeking the death penalty against his client Steven Hayes- and yet providing extreme security measures to simultaeously protect him from a possible attempt on his life by a vigilante.

Well in this country Ullmann, we also don't torture our inmates and let a lynch mob at them, no matter how much complicity they clearly have in murdering and raping a mother and two children. (both men were caught fleeing the murder scene in the Petit family car and both
men confessed in varying degrees to their parts in the crimes). We also have a sometimes frustrating duty to protect these same predators from raging vigilantism both within and out- side of, the prison walls: Hence, the 24 hour security protection that Steven Hayes has been the fortunate recipient of, ever since his initial incarceration 3 years ago, just after he committed these crimes. Security that has cost the state and taxpayers hundreds of thousands of dollars, I might add. And security, that his own attorney has complained about more than once, implying that it is entirely unneccesary and overly dramatic, no doubt trying to play down the level of public hostility and rage that in fact poses a very real threat to his clients life.

But I digress... if Ullmann had no qualms making it clear what he felt about the states pursuit of the death penalty against his client, not to mention open criticism regarding other aspects of its handling of this case, why then the outrage at sole surviving victim Bill Petit who has much more of a genuine stake in these things, for expressing his feelings about this very same subject? ( albeit Dr Petit does so in a much more respectful fashion and generally only when asked by members of the media, most recently as they intercept him outside of the courthouse as he enters or exits the latest hearing hijacked by the defense's latest whinings.

Ullmanns lack of professional integrity and generally bad behavior at this stage of the trial is setting a tone for this defense, and I for one hope it continues as it will backfire, both with the judge as well as the jury, who will not be inclined to believe anything that comes out of this mans mouth when they see that he will do or say anything- no matter how vile, insensitive or blatantly dishonest, in an effort to "win"-- Which in such a hopeless case equals" saving" his client from a death penalty verdict.