Comparing Dally to Other Killers Barred

When Diana Haun’s lawyers urged a jury to spare her from execution, they argued that when compared to more notorious killers, she was not among “the worst of the worst.”

It worked. After recommending a sentence of life in prison without parole, jurors said the defense argument was persuasive: Haun was not on par with the likes of Charles Manson or Richard Ramirez, though she had fatally stabbed her lover’s wife.

Irked by the strategy, prosecutors quickly filed a motion to stop attorneys for Haun’s co-defendant, Michael Dally, from making the same argument during the penalty phase of his trial.

On Thursday, the request was taken up by Superior Court Judge Charles W. Campbell Jr., who ruled that Dally’s lawyers would not be permitted to make comparisons between their client and other convicted murderers.

But the judge said he would permit the defense to argue that Dally, when looked at in the larger context of the criminal justice system, is not a good candidate for the death penalty.

The 37-year-old former grocery store worker was convicted of murder last week for planning the killing of his wife, Sherri, with Haun.

The penalty phase of the trial, expected to last just two days, starts Monday when the same jury will determine whether Dally should be executed or sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys continued a two-day hearing Thursday on what evidence and arguments will be allowed during the proceedings.

Although the lawyers had intended to discuss the proposed testimony of Dally’s 10-year-old son, Devon, or alternately his psychologist, John Goulet, Farley told the court Thursday that he hadn’t met with Goulet and needed more time.

Either Goulet or Devon will testify next week, Farley said. But he is still unsure which one will be called. Prosecutors want to know what Goulet would say on the stand before deciding whether they would object to his testimony.

On the issue of what attorneys could say during their closing argument, Deputy Dist. Atty. Michael Frawley told the judge that defense lawyers must stick to the 11 factors given to the jury for consideration of punishment.

But defense attorney James Farley disagreed, arguing that he should be allowed to broaden the argument when fighting for his client’s life.

“They keep saying it is wrong to say the death penalty is reserved for the worst of the worst. That is what the death penalty is for,” he argued angrily.

“We are allowed in this phase of the case,” he said, “to talk about these types of things to the jury.”

Supporting the defense position, Campbell said that the 11 factors for consideration of a death sentence are not viewed in a vacuum.

“They are not looked at in some mathematical equation,” he said.