Below is an article from the L.A. Times about the Nichols case. In it, House Speaker Rep. Glenn Richardson goes off about the cost of the defense. Those who follow state politics may recognize Richardson as a complete dumb ass. Of course, they would be right. Richardson is getting his butt kicked because he's promoting a stupid idea that will raise taxes.

In this case, however, Richardson is just jumping on the bandwagon. The fact is, there are two reasons this case is costing so much. One, it's a freakin' complicated case involving multiple jurisdictions, the federal government, and a huge media spotlight. Never mind that many of the folks who would usually be involved in the defense or prosecution in Fulton County could end up being called as witnesses. The second reason is the D.A.'s office. I firmly believe almost all problems with the criminal justice system are caused by either the legislature or the district attorneys. This case proves my point. The L.A. Times article has a paragraph (down towards the bottom of course) detailing how the D.A.'s office challenged one of the original lawyers, one who was on staff with the Public Defenders Standards Council. I don't believe the Council has even one backbone in the entire office, so they substituted all the lawyers with private (and costly) ones.

This is only one incident. Fulton County D.A. Howard, who never met a media frenzy he didn't like, has FIVE prosecutors on the case. Maybe he needs them, maybe not. But why isn't Richardson up in arms about those costs? Could it be because this case actually highlights what a dismal failure the legislature has done in funding public defense? That's not a problem with D.A.'s since they get a piece of almost all the action in the state, possibly including playground toughs taking milk money.

If the D.A. takes the death penalty off the table, the costs go way down. If he won't, then he should be blamed for the costs. If politicians want the ability to tramp human rights at will, they shouldn't complain that it costs a lot.

Costly trial puts heat on Georgia judge
By Richard Fausset, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

ATLANTA -- Angered by the soaring cost of defending Georgia's most notorious murder suspect, state lawmakers said Thursday they would explore the possibility of impeaching the judge presiding over the case of Brian Nichols, the rape suspect who escaped from a courthouse in 2005 and allegedly killed a judge and three others.

Critics say DeKalb County Senior Judge Hilton Fuller has mismanaged the high-profile death penalty case. They are particularly incensed that he has allowed attorneys hired by the state's public defender program to rack up more than $1.2 million in pretrial expenses and fees.

The case has come to a halt because of disputes about those payments.

"How many more millions will be spent giving Brian Nichols a defense that no one, including the taxpayers, could afford for themselves?" said Republican House Speaker Glenn Richardson in a statement. "There are serious questions about the poor handling of public funds that need to be addressed. The law provides the House that authority, and we intend to investigate the matter."

Richardson said he planned to appoint a special committee, headed by attorney and Republican state House Majority Whip Barry A. Fleming, to investigate Fuller's handling of the trial and whether there was an "abuse of the system."

It was a rare move for a state legislature, and one that could raise thorny separation-of-powers issues. But Republican state Sen. Preston W. Smith said he feared other death-penalty defendants would take Nichols' lead and find a way to run up costs, making it difficult -- if not impossible -- for the state to prosecute capital cases.

"I'm concerned that the judge's behavior is going to lead to the system, as we know it, being dismantled," he said.

Fuller, a veteran judge known for his attention to detail, could not be reached for comment Thursday. He volunteered to preside over the Nichols trial in neighboring Fulton County because the county's entire Superior Court bench had recused itself from the case.

Nichols escaped from a deputy at his rape trial in a Fulton County courtroom. He then allegedly fatally shot the judge presiding over a case, a court reporter, a sheriff's deputy and a U.S. customs agent. Nichols' alleged crimes, and the manhunt that followed, shocked Atlantans and was covered by international news outlets.

Soon after Nichols' arrest, the Georgia Public Defender Standards Council assigned a team of salaried defense lawyers to the case, but prosecutors raised issues about the standing of one of the attorneys with the State Bar of Georgia, and moved to disqualify the entire public defender's program from the case.

The council withdrew the original lawyers, and in an abundance of caution, assembled a new team that included three outside lawyers who billed by the hour. Fuller approved those rates, which are as high as $175 per hour, in July 2005. By last August, according to court documents, they had billed for more than $700,000 in attorneys fees and $200,000 in expert fees.

Two of the defense attorneys contacted by The Times declined to discuss the case. But their colleague, North Carolina-based Henderson Hill, has argued that the prosecutors are to blame for the trial's high cost.

Fulton County Dist. Atty. Paul Howard's office has assigned five assistant prosecutors to the Nichols case. They filed a 54-count indictment and submitted the names of 300 potential witnesses. Defense attorneys argue that they need a budget that allows them to mount a sufficiently vigorous defense.

Howard declined to comment for this story. But in court filings, prosecutors argued that the defense was trying to give the impression that the case was "too expensive to try and the State should just take a plea."

The case is taking a toll on Georgia's public defender system. The Legislature cut the system's budget for the public defender's council about 20% this year. It owes the three outside attorneys more than $160,000, and has declined to pay, despite an order from Fuller.

On Oct. 17, Fuller halted the case after two days of jury selection after the defense attorneys asked that the funding issues be resolved. Fuller ordered the council's director, Mack Crawford, to a hearing to determine whether he was in contempt of court. The hearing was postponed, and a new date had not yet been set.

richard.fausset@latimes.com