Judge Jon Blue stayed back on Thomas Ullman's curveball and hit it right out of New Haven yesterday. Ullman, as you might remember, tried to float an off-speed bender past the prosecution by arguing that the death penalty in Connecticut violates his client's rights. his client, of course, is accused triple-murderer, steven hayes.
part of ullman's argument centered around the words of Connecticut governor, Jodi Rell. In the wake of the Cheshire murders, Rell vetoed legislation that would have abolished the death penalty in Ct. in a press release and other documents explaining the reason behind her veto, Rell cited Dr. Petit, the lone survivor of the Cheshire home-invasion, who in turn cited Lord Denning, the Brit jurist who believed that some crimes just deserve the death penalty.
but only a handful of the thousands of prospective jurors interviewed for hayes' trial knew the wording of Rell's veto, Blue said (let alone who Lord Denning was).
the other part of ullman's argument was that the legislature that passed the bill abolishing the death penalty was representative of the will of the people of Connecticut. Not true, though. sixty percent of Ct. supports the needle, and that number has been constant for a lot of years.
so ullman falls behind one-ziltch in the opening inning and steven hayes' life is still at stake when his trial starts on sept. 13th
blog |
|
