death penalty news October 26, 2004
CALIFORNIA: Attorneys Differ Over Possible Alexander Death Penalty A prosecutor and a defense lawyer differed strongly today over whether convicted murderer Stuart Alexander's long history of violence justifies sentencing him to death. A San Leandro sausage plant owner who called himself "The Sausage King," Alexander, 43, was convicted last week of murdering three meat inspectors who were investigating allegations that he was violating food safety regulations. In his opening statement in the penalty phase of Alexander's trial in Alameda County Superior Court, prosecutor John Laettner told jurors he will present evidence that Alexander engaged in many acts of violence before the June 21, 2000, shooting rampage at the sausage factory. Laettner also said there would be emotional testimony from the meat inspectors' family members about how their lives have been devastated by the tragic event. Laettner told jurors that at the end of the penalty phase, which is expected to last at least a month, "We'll be asking you to do justice and sentence Stuart Alexander to death for these evil and heinous acts." But Alexander's lawyer, Assistant Public Defender Michael Ogul, said Alexander should be spared from the death penalty because "he's not the worst of the worst" and "is not a cold-blooded predator who just picks out victims off the street." Alexander was convicted of of three counts of first-degree murder, one count of attempted murder and four special circumstances murder charges that made him eligible for the death penalty. At the end of the penalty phase, the same jurors who convicted Alexander will choose between recommending the death penalty or life in prison without parole. "The issue is not whether Stuart Alexander will ever have another breath of fresh air as a free man, as you've decided that he will not, but whether he will spend the rest of his life in prison or be executed,' Ogul told jurors. Laettner said Alexander "sent people to the hospital in the 1970s, the 1980s and the 1990s" in a long series of violent incidents and threatened people on numerous occasions. According to the prosecutor, Alexander committed his first known act of violence at the age of 17 when he hit a bicyclist with a tire iron after lying in wait following a confrontation. Alexander's last act of violence before the shooting incident was in August of 1996 when he assaulted a 75-year-old man in San Leandro after the man complained that Alexander, who was 35 at the time, was illegally dumping items in a San Leandro dump, Laettner said. In between those events, on July 4, 1984, Alexander allegedly used five gallons of gasoline to destroy a camper at a beach in Half Moon Bay following a confrontation with a motorcycle group, Laettner said. Following that incident, Half Moon Bay officials decided not to allow fireworks at the beach anymore, Laettner said. Ogul said Alexander "has a temper and is a hothead," isn't good about talking about his emotions and "did the inexcusable" by killing the meat inspectors. But Ogul said Alexander "did not kill them to rob them for financial gain or kill them in cold blood." The defense attorney said Alexander "was driven to kill them" after a long series of events, beginning with the death of his father, that drove him into bankruptcy. Ogul said that although Alexander has been involved in many violent incidents, he's also committed many good deeds, such as contributing money to numerous youth and civic groups. He said he plans to call as a character witness Mother Mary Anne Wright, an Oakland woman famed for helping the homeless. Alexander "loved Mother Wright" and paid some of her bills, Ogul said. Known for his short fuse, Ogul asked Judge Vernon Nakahara to remove himself from Alexander's case after the judge admonished Ogul for interrupting him during a discussion outside the presence of jurors about legal issues in the trial. "There was a pause," Ogul said, attempting to explain why he interrupted the judge. "No there wasn't," Nakahara said. Ogul said the judge's comments to him "reflect a bias, an appearance of impropriety" and are "one more example of the court trying to manipulate this case." Nakahara responded, "Mr. Ogul, that's absolutely ridiculous." He denied Ogul's motion to remove himself from the trial, just as he denied numerous previous requests by Ogul, who also has made many unsuccessful motions for a mistrial. (source: Bad City News / KTVU)
