NORWICH – The Honorable Judge Howard Sullivan decided to recuse himself from the second murder trial of Peter M. Wlasiuk Friday.
Sullivan explained his reasons in a five-page decision. “One thing is certain this court’s determinations – though out there somewhere in the future – are already fodder for second-guessing throughout any retrial. The defendant will question the court’s every adverse ruling. The people might question any ruling favorable to the defendant – wondering if subconsciously, perhaps, the court has compensated for defendant’s endless mistrust to their disadvantage. Ultimately the appearance of fairness and impartiality will be sacrificed on the altar of suspicion,” said Sullivan.
In his initial Sept. 22 court appearance, Wlasiuk and his acting attorney, Public Defender Alan Gordon, asked the Sullivan to step down, referring to a number of remarks made during the first trial. During Wlasiuk’s sentencing in 2003, Sullivan said, “You are a sick and evil man who will no doubt kill again given the opportunity.”
“Your honor, you are a very well-respected member of the community and carry great influence. The fact you made those comments will make it harder to find a jury,” said Gordon.
Sullivan’s decision released Friday stated, “Sentencing is the time when a judge will express his sympathy for the victims, empathize with their suffering and remind a convicted defendant and the community in no uncertain terms that reprehensible acts do have dire consequences.” The appeals court decision which overturned Wlasiuk’s conviction did not mention bias on part of the judge, but did say evidence allowed by Sullivan produced unfair bias in the jury.
Wlasiuk was found guilty of 2nd degree murder and given the maximum sentence of 25 years to life for allegedly murdering his wife Patricia and then staging a vehicle accident at Guilford Lake to cover it up in 2002. The New York Supreme Court of Appeals declared Wlasiuk’s first trial unfair in August, citing a number of procedural shortcomings, most of them revolving around the introduction of past violent acts against his wife. The appellate court said that certain letters and diary entries should not have been allowed by the judge and found merit in the defendant’s claims that the district attorney conducted himself aggressively.
During that trial, District Attorney Joseph McBride in his “respectful disagreement” with Sullivan, stated that he felt like the court was “actually lying to this jury by leaving out facts of domestic violence” between Peter and Patricia Wlasiuk. Sullivan disagreed and said that the prosecution and himself would “find themselves right back here trying this case again on appeal if (he) allowed this evidence.”
The County Clerk’s office said that the request for appointing a new judge is still pending. It is up to the Administrative Judge Judith O’Shea of the 6th Judicial District to decide who the next presiding judge will be. Walsiuk remains incarcerated at the Chenango County Correctional Facility.