I found this article in my archives today of all places.
Having recalled that this Post generated a lot of controversial commenting, I thought it more deserving then residing in dusty old draftswille, in fact I don't know how it wound up there.
From today's vantage point, many months later, as we now enter the penalty phase of Steven Hayes trial, which commences tomorrow morning, the piece has an even bigger punch than it did when first written:
As much as this columnist expressed what seemed a genuine respect for veteran public defender Thomas Ullmann, by doing so within this frame of reference, she almost seemed to be willing him not to pull a redux of the Michael Ross debacle with Hayes ie When Ross, like Hayes, wished to take accountability for his crimes and Ross's over- zealous public defenders, simply and quite literally-would not allow it.
At the same time, the writer seemed resigned to the fact that, her admiration for Ullmann not withstanding, the Hayes case was already heading in the same direction at that very moment.
She was right of course.
Attorney Ullmann and Culligan and their team of tax paid minions, fought tooth and nail to disallow Hayes from doing what was his absolute right to do:plead guilty to the crimes that he was accused of AND INDEED committed.
Every legal parlor trick in the book was brought out: first his competency was questioned, then when he was found to be competent, Ullmann and Culligan threatened that if need be, they would break the attorney/ client privilege and share information with the court that Hayes had made to them, within that pact, that would supposedly influence the court regarding the finding of his own ability to represent himself and declare himself guilty.
He gave in his lawyers in the end and reversed his plea back to Not Guilty and Ullmann got to walk away thinking himself a hero for refusing to" let Steven Hayes' commit state assisted suicide." This after he stated that a life in prison on death row is worse than the death penalty itself.
Which is it Mr Ullmann? Or are you suggesting he deserves worse than the Capital punishment that was in fact LAW when he and Komisarjevsky with full aforethought and Mal intent, set about breaking into the Petit household with their primary motive sexual assault
ie their phone texts prior to the crimes had Hayes chomping at the bit to start the evening's rape and carnage"Hold your horses dude:" HAYES REPLIED Dude my horses are ready to bust out !!!"
This was a clear sexual reference and illustrates beyond a doubt that the two men had discussed raping Michaela and likely Hayley, according to Kmisarjevsky's interviews with writer Mike MacDonald who he surreptitiously met with in prison for "interviews" based on Komisarjevsky;s version of the crimes, he in effect sold Hayes on the home invasion cajoling him and titillating his evil side telling him how attractive the girls and Mrs Petit a young blond shapely mother of both teens. He'd spotted then stalked the family at an area supermarket and followed them home with his pedophilia lust trained upon Michaela only eleven years old.
Tragically all we are left with is a 20 20 hindsight and a murdered mother and her two young daughters. We cannot continue to forget that Dr Petit was severely assaulted in this so called home invasion which is clearly a set of sex crimes whereupon the family member who poses the most threat is removed first Mr Petit was the only man of the house asleep on the sunporch when the men stalked the house intent upon their mission. Rape pillage and Burn the evidence.