.jpg)
Site Search
Legal legend heads to NH
By RUSS CHOMA Anti-death penalty advocate David I. Bruck has represented dozens of dead men walking. Men and women who it would appear have little chance of avoiding the death penalty, either because they've already been sentenced or because their crimes seem so appalling to society. He is not known for getting his clients acquitted, but he has a remarkable record of convincing juries to spare his clients' lives. Now, he has come to New Hampshire as co-counsel for John "Jay" Brooks, who if convicted at his trial this summer, could become the first person executed in the state of New Hampshire since 1939. Friends and opponents of Bruck praise him as a talented defense attorney, almost peerless in his skill and knowledge of the law, and as a passionate opponent of the death penalty. Bruck is one of five attorneys representing Brooks, who is accused of orchestrating a 2005 murder-for-hire plot to kill Jack Reid. Another man, Michael Addison, is also facing the death penalty in the murder of Manchester Police officer Michael Briggs, but Brooks will go to trial first, next August. While Addison has been assigned a team of public defenders, former Derry resident Brooks made millions when he sold his company, Polyvac, for $140 million. He has hired his own legal team. Bruck was brought on this past summer and made his first arguments in person in January at a hearing where he began laying the groundwork for a case that the state's death penalty sentencing process is unconstitutional. The judge in the case has ruled that it is far too early in the case to deal with the issue. The Susan Smith caseBruck began his legal career in South Carolina in that state's public defender office, moving almost exclusively to death penalty defense cases in the 1980s. After establishing a death penalty defense resource center in South Carolina, he went on to become involved with federal death penalty cases and now teaches full-time at Washington and Lee University Law School in Lexington, Va. One of Bruck's more notorious clients was Susan Smith, a South Carolina woman accused of letting her car roll into a lake while her two young children were still inside.  ►Murder plea in Brooks case Initially Smith claimed she had been carjacked, but later confessed to the crime, leading to an enormous public backlash. Although Smith was ultimately found guilty, Bruck convinced a jury to let her serve life in prison instead of face execution. Tommy Pope, the county district attorney who prosecuted the case, recalls how Bruck was able to turn the tide of public opinion even before the trial began. "At some point, in the nine months from when the crime took place to the time we tried it, she went from Susan the monster to Susan the victim," Pope said. "I give him credit. They worked the jury pool in essence." Bruck brandished a Bible before the jury and quietly read: "He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone." It took less than two hours for the jury to agree to the death penalty. Dick Harpootlian, a South Carolina attorney and former district attorney who squared off against Bruck on several occasions, warned against being fooled by Bruck's calm courtroom demeanor. "He's so understated, he can be deceptive in making a point," Harpootlian said. "He's so quiet and soft-spoken it's sometimes difficult to understand you're getting ready to have the trap door closed on you." Bruck closed the trap door on Harpootlian during a death penalty case the two argued before the U.S. Supreme Court in 1994. Bruck successfully argued his client's death sentence was unfair because the jury was never told the man -- who had been convicted of murdering an elderly woman -- would not be eligible for parole if given a life sentence. The man was later retried and sentenced to life. It was one of Bruck's six victories on a death penalty issue before the Supreme Court. He walks softlyDefense attorney Judy Clarke, who also represented Smith at Bruck's invitation, agreed with Harpootlian's assessment that Bruck walks softly through his cases -- often to devastating effect. "People find themselves leaning forward to hear what he is saying because he is so soft-spoken," she said. "But there is nothing soft-spoken about his message. It's heartfelt and it's compassionate." Clarke said Bruck won't make any theatrical closing arguments or scream at the jury. "He's not a table pounder; he doesn't have to be," she said. "He's just beyond comparison. He's got what you don't see in ordinary folk. It's not because he's grabbing anybody by the neck, it's the power of his words and his thoughts that makes him so special and good." All three spoke glowingly of Bruck, in and out of court, describing him as a friend who always treated them with respect even when they disagreed. Clarke went on to represent a number of high-profile defendants herself, including Ted Kaczynski, the "Unabomber," and credits Bruck with inspiring her to devote her own career to death penalty cases. "David Bruck is the reason I do this work, and I alternate between blaming him and thanking him," said Clarke. "(Working with Bruck) completely changed my career." None of those interviewed said they knew why Bruck had taken the Brooks case, and neither Bruck nor any of his co-counsel would comment for this article or discuss how much he is being paid for the work. Clarke said she has not spoken to him about the case, but suspects Bruck sees something special. "I'm sure it's something about the case, something about the client, something about the timing," she said. "He took cases in South Carolina he didn't need to take. There's always something he's thinking of, rather than just someone calling him. He's thinking about what special skill he can bring." |
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. © 1997-2009.
YOUR COMMENTS
The voices of UnionLeader.com readers: To join UnionLeader.com's discussion of the news, use the form below.
NOTE: If you have read this article before, you may not be seeing the newest comments. Press F5. Or click "Refresh" or "Reload" at the top of this page while holding down Ctrl. All approved postings will appear. (Another option for Firefox users is the Clear Cache add-on.)
More than half the countries of the world have abolished the death penalty. The US shares the dubious distinction of State sanctioned killings with China, Iraq, Iran and other not so enlightened nations. Punishment by death is considered barbaric in most of the western world and is a violation of human rights. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has stated: ""The forfeiture of life is too absolute, too irreversible, for one human being to inflict it on another, even when backed by legal process.""
Our own NH Legislature abolished the death penalty in 2000. Not so wisely, Jeanne Shaheen vetoed it. Maybe when the government stops murdering people, society will become less violent. Study after study has shown that the death penalty is no deterrent to crime. So, what's the point? Vengeance? An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind!
- PP_BJ, Nottingham
Of course money can meke a "guilty" person quickly become "not guilty". It wasn't that long ago but I remember OJ's "dreamteam" of lawyers that all of his money bought, and I remember seeing the verdict read. When someone kills someone else, we shouldn't think, he's black, he's white, it's MURDER, plain and simple, and the devestation that follows a murder will be felt for lifetimes.
- tom, manchester
Hey Tom, were didn't you learn anything from the NH primaries?? Polls aren't always the best representation of what the people of NH actually believe. So trying to use a poll for argument to overturn the death penalty is pointless. We have a death penalty for a reason and an individual such as this as well as Addison and a few others who have committed horrible crimes should get the ultimate punishment.
- Derek Myers, Manchester, NH
to Bob...
I think Donna was just saying that conservatives who are pro-life when they are talking about abortion and saying ever life matters, and there's no justification for taking even one unborn life, are being hypocritical if they don't have the same stance on the death penalty. I tend to agree, if you say life is sacred in the womb, then it should be sacred out of the womb too.
Warehousing an inmate for $30k a year certainly is a raw deal for taxpayers, but do the cost/benefit analysis - an execution costs between $750,000 and $1 million as of a few years ago. Brooks will probably not live long enough in prison to rack up the equal cost of executing him five years from now. Addison might, but I think there should be bigger considerations than pure cost.
I also disagree that we should care what the rest of the country thinks about the death penalty.
From the AP in 2000:
As the New Hampshire Senate Judiciary Committee voted 5-1 to recommend that the state's death penalty law be repealed, a new poll by Northeastern University found that:
* 55% of New Hampshire residents support abolition of the state's death penalty, 35% oppose it, and 10% are undecided.
* The poll, released on May 8, also shows that 78% of residents believe the death penalty is too arbitrary,
* and 60% believe it is better to put murderers in prison for life than to risk executing an innocent person.
- Tom, Manchester
Are you kidding me, Bob Ahern...These are two different cases, if Brooks gets life and Addison gets death, maybe it is the added heinous offense of also killing a police officer. Therefor the simple minded nonsense of "both capital murder cases" let me educate you, killing a police officer is consider an aggravated circumstance to allow for the Death Penalty. Now, Bob and the rest of you, would you like to apologize to our public defenders here in NH (which by the way we have some of the best, and I'm not just saying it, they are nationally recognized). Why do you assume that money will get one person off (death row) and no money will convict one (on death row). I am disgusted to see so many assume that because Addison has public defenders that he is done. Let me propose this, Brooks and Addison are both done because the evidence will show that beyond a reasonable doubt they are guilty, as for the sentence, Addison better get death, Brooks may benefit from Brucks.
- Rick, Manchester
To Donna of Nashua: From your writing it sounds like it's YOU trying to get the rest of US to be more consistent with YOUR values. Over 70% of Americans support the death penalty. And before you even say it, you’re right; it's not a deterrent to murder. It's punishment for Capital Murder. It's punishment that the taxpayer's only have to pay for once. Not year after year warehousing capital offenders at a cost of about $30,000/yr. Welcome to the real world, Donna
- Bob Ahern, Derry
Pro life means anti death penalty. Conservatives need to brush up on their ideological integrity.
Only God should make or take a life.
This is about more than punishing heinous offenders. It's about being consistent with your values.
It's wrong to kill. No matter who you are or for what reason.
- Donna, Nashua
To Ray Ninness of Bedford. They may be guilty well beyond a doubt but our current legal system is afforded to ALL. As well, they are presumed innocent until proven guilty. A very high percentage of Murders in NH are solved and the conviction rate (for murder is well into the 99% rate) The system works. As well, no crime is indefensible. Regardless of how bad they may seem and how heinous the crime may be, they deserve, under our constitution, a speedy and fair trial. Imagine a judicial system that was one sided only. Prosecution, but no defense allowed. How well do you think that would work? The scales of justice say it all. Balanced.
- Bob Ahern, Derry
NH should just switch to life w/o parole for these two and send this Bruck clown home without his lunch. I'm all in favor of the death penalty, but it's become far too much of a hassle. As long as villians such as these are never allowed to walk free again, I'm happy. Our money and resources are much better spent on ensuring convictions rather than wasted on fighting over the penalties.
- Jose H, Manchester, NH
Maybe he should offer his money to keep this loser incarcerated! On the other hand they can have a few of my bucks to get rid of this one and lots of others!!
- Jesse, Orford
As I've noted before out Justice System is NOT equal. Those who claim it is are blowing smoke. Brook’s has the financial resources to bring in a heavy gun such as Bruck. Bruck's record is very good...impressive. Michael Addison cannot afford heavy gun such as Bruck. Regardless of the crime (or how the community feels emotionally toward each defendant), a person of substantial wealth such as Brooks can potentially avoid the death penalty. All legal scholars agree with this unfair principal but it’s our culture an it capitalism at work. This is not what our country stands for. If by chance Brook’s beats the death penalty because of Bruck, and Addison ends up facing the death penalty they’ll be an outcry beyond loud that will certainly embarrass New Hampshire as a state with unfair judicial practices.. Yes, I know, Addison allegedly shot a Police Officer and Brooks did not. However they are both capital Murder cases. As well, according to the Law and the Bible, no one life is worth more than another. BY the way, I support the death penalty.
- Bob Ahern, Derry
Some people are guilty well beyond doubt, and their crimes so heinous, that defending become a show of of just how ludicrous our legal system has become.
The crimes that Boorks and Addison are accused of are just indefensible, so now it becomes time to bring in the clowns and charlatans.. And of course it will be the tax payer that will in the end foot the bill..
- Ray Ninness, Bedfrod
It seems that this person does not think that our great state knows enough about the law and perhaps he thinks he can teach us a few things as far as the death penalty is concerned...Thats all New Hampshire needs right now, another bleeding heart liberal.
- dick johnson, warren