Hits: 0
WPCNR WHITE PLAINS LAW JOURNAL. By S. Richard Blassberg, WPCNR Legal Affairs Correspondent. May 22, 2003: As this report is being filed the jury has begun to deliberate the fate of convicted murderer Dennis Alvarez-Hernandez at the Westchester County Courthouse.
Surely their heads and hearts are filled with more information and emotion than any of them could ever have anticipated more than six weeks ago when the trial began. To these four men and eight women now falls the task of making a decision each of them will live with for the rest of their lives. And, having been in the courtroom with them throughout the trial, I would say this is their most difficult moment.
WPCNR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT
S. RICHARD BLASSBERG
Photo by WPCNR News
Self-Righteousness Replaced by Sudden Impact.
Their mood has grown noticeably more stern and attentive in the past several days of testimony that comprised the punishment phase of this bifurcated proceeding. Finding the Defendant guilty of Murder One was almost a foregone conclusion from the outset, as evidenced by their very brief, (less than four hour), deliberation, and their light and smiling mood upon presentation of the verdict. But, having thus convicted, they must now decide whether or not to take a man’s life.
Power Summations to Ponder
I can honestly say that Patricia Murphy for the Prosecution and Robert Aiello for the Defense were, each nothing short of brilliant in their summations Tuesday. In a courtroom packed with family, reporters, and witnesses, Murphy delivered a highly emotional appeal calculated to inflame and produce an “eye for an eye” mentality in the jurors who had just been exposed to a week of mitigating evidence put on by the Defense. The essential thrust of her argument was to convince the jurors that the crimes committed were so brutal and unjustified as to absolutely demand a death sentence.
D.A. Walks Out Before Defense Summation. Appears to Dismiss Seriousness of Occasion.
Murphy was her very best, and nobody appeared to appreciate the performance more than her boss, District Attorney Jeanine Pirro, who sat smiling on the edge of her seat throughout.
It’s noteworthy that Mrs. Pirro did not remain to hear the Defense summation preferring instead to make a quick retreat, pausing only to wait for an elevator and to turn briefly to those of us behind her to issue an inappropriate laugh out loud. I, for one, failed to see the joke, unless, of course, she was musing over her power to influence so many lives for her own purposes.
Aiello Pulls Out the Stops. Peppered with Unprecedented Objections Again.
Aiello was everything he needed to be and more. He was calm, if a bit nervous. He was reasonable and persuasive, prevailing upon each juror’s humanity and compassion. He wisely drew a distinction between the crimes of his client and those of persons such Timothy McVeigh, Ted Bundy, or John Taylor, the Wendy’s Killer, in an effort to place things into perspective. He quoted from the Bible imploring that his client was not without remorse, nor beyond redemption.
Aiello was several times interrupted by objections from Mr. Bolen, nearly every one of which was over-ruled by Judge Lange. It was quite apparent to this reporter, throughout this punishment phase of the trial, both Bolen and Patricia Murphy were unable to deal with the latitude the State Legislature has granted Defense counsel to present mitigating evidence in an effort to spare a convicted client’s life. Perhaps the statutory requirements were somewhat harder for these two prosecutors to accept than they might have been had they been working for someone other than Jeanine Pirro, accustomed as she is to always getting her way.
Setting a New Standard for Death Penalty Cases?
Finally, Judge Kenneth Lange once again took great care and effort to instruct the jury as to the responsibilities and their options. Throughout the trial, Lange had skillfully, and in some instances, courageously dealt with the opposing factions, always mindful of the law, and always gentle with the jury.
Nevertheless, Prosecution and Defense each come to the end of this historic trial with their share of applications and rulings which may well live on for years in the appeals process depending upon the sentencing outcome which both sides now anxiously await.
