HARRIS TRIAL TRANSFERRED TO MONMOUTH COUNTY
TRENTON
– Mercer
County Prosecutor Daniel G. Giaquinto said that a judge’s ruling today
transferring the murder trial of Ambrose Harris to Monmouth County was not
unexpected and will not be appealed.
“Although
we had wanted to keep the trial in Mercer County, we understand the judge’s
ruling. As I said in court, we had already agreed to accept Monmouth County as a
possible transfer site if the judge ruled to move the trial,” Giaquinto said.
In
making his ruling, Superior Court Judge Charles A. Delehey found that
“presumed prejudice” against the defendant in Mercer County prevents him
from receiving a fair trial here.
Harris
(DOB 5/9/52), formerly of Trenton, is accused of murdering fellow death-row
inmate Robert Simon (DOB 9/4/51) on Sept. 7 following an altercation in the
indoor recreation module of the death row unit at New Jersey State Prison in
Trenton.
Harris
is on death row awaiting execution for the brutal 1992 kidnapping, rape and
murder of Pennsylvania graphic artist Kristin Huggins. That conviction remains
on appeal, but has been upheld by the state Supreme Court.
Delehey,
who was the same judge who presided during Harris’ first murder trial, had
concluded then that due to extensive – and sometimes virulent – publicity
that “presumed prejudice” existed. Today, Delehey said the “presumed
prejudice” against Harris in Mercer County remains.
Giaquinto
argued in court against the transfer, saying that the defense, which had brought
the motion to move the trial to a different county, had failed to prove
“presumed prejudice” exists by presenting clear and convincing evidence, the
required legal standard. As a result, Giaquinto said jury selection should occur
here then if “actual prejudice” was voiced by prospective jurors saying they
could not be fair because of the publicity, the trial could still be moved.
In
upholding Harris’ death penalty conviction, the state Supreme Court
established a lower threshold for the defense to meet in establishing
“presumed prejudice” exists in capital cases. That new standard applies only
to death penalty cases while non-capital cases remain controlled by the “clear
and convincing” legal standard, Giaquinto said.
Giaquinto
told Delehey that this was one of several factors that weighed into his decision
to charge Harris with non-death penalty murder in Simon’s killing.
Unlike
the news reporting during Harris’ first trial, media coverage following
Simon’s murder has been responsible and proportional given the uniqueness of
the case, Giaquinto said. Also, the publicity surrounding the Huggins murder had
subsided in the years since the case ended and there has not been the constant
stream of publicity surrounding the current case that had existed during every
aspect of the first case, Giaquinto noted.
In addition, the victim in the current case
is unsympathetic and there has even been some public sentiment that Harris had
done the community a favor rather than the widespread public outrage expressed
when Huggins was slain, Giaquinto said.
In
the current case it is alleged that Harris, who was also in the recreation unit,
assaulted Simon multiple times. No weapon was used. Corrections officials
sounded an alarm when the altercation broke out about 10:55 a.m. and a prison
doctor pronounced Simon dead at 11:10 a.m. The Mercer County Medical Examiner
concluded that Simon had died from massive injuries consistent with someone
“repeatedly stomping on his face.”