ARTICLE TEXT - 2 OF 2
TI: In what circumstances do you typically offer a plea deal?
KU: If we’re asked if we have one. But every case proceeds on its own dynamics. There are cases where a defense attorney will come up to you and say, ‘I have to take this case to trial. The consequences are too bad for my client. He’ll lose his job. He’ll go to jail for a long time.’ So you know that’s not a case that’s going to plead. That happens. It was clear from the moment that Cristina started in the case that this was about guilt or innocence—it was not about some sort of plea. And at sentencing, after Cristina was discharged and they came in with a new attorney for sentencing, Adnan stood up and basically said, ‘I have consistently maintained my innocence, and I maintain that today.’ So it was clear that Cristina was, in effect, trying it the way he wanted it tried.
TI: So, it’s difficult to say she was ineffective on that, and there’s no right to a plea deal?
KU: There’s no constitutional right to a plea. There are a lot of cases where the client demands that you try it, and from all the evidence I saw, that was what Adnan wanted.
TI: There’s also some confusion about a person who pled the Fifth during the grand jury.
KU: That’s something I can’t get into.
TI: We’ll move on.
KU: If there’s anything that occurred at the grand jury that has not been released through one of the exceptions—for example, it’s a witness who testifies at trial, and you have to give the defense the grand jury testimony for cross-examination purposes—except for very few, limited exceptions, all grand jury testimony is secret and remains secret until the end of time—or it’s supposed to.
TI: Do you feel that Cristina Gutierrez presented a good defense?
KU: She presented a good defense in a case where she was unable to have any real defense. There’s an old saying in law school: ‘If the facts are on your side, you argue the facts. If the law is on your side, argue the law. If neither is on your side, you pound the table.’ She pounded the table.
TI: There are lot of fans of “Serial” who paint Adnan as the victim of ineffective counsel.
KU: She was not an inexperienced defense attorney. From the mid to late ’90s, she was one of the premiere defense attorneys in Baltimore City. She was very highly recommended by the defense bar. All the problems she had came later, when she had serious health problems that caused her to be a little bit fast and loose with some things, and she ended up getting disbarred. But that was after this. At this time, she was a premiere defense attorney, very aggressive, very hard-nosed.
TI: Let’s talk about the mistrial. The first trial got scratched because the judge called Cristina a liar?
KU: He didn’t directly call her a liar. I don’t remember what he said. Like I said, Cristina was very quick. And she saw that, and she yelled very loudly, ‘Judge, you just called me a liar.’ So the entire courtroom heard her. She saw the opportunity to get a mistrial, and she went for it. [Ed. note: According to trial transcripts as read by Sarah Koenig on "Serial," Gutierrez said, 'It's very hard to be quiet when a court is accusing me of lying.']
TI: When did Koenig first contact you?
KU: I don’t recall ever being contacted by her. The first contact I had with her was just before, I think, the week before the last podcast. [Ed. note: "Serial" maintains that Koenig left several messages, at multiple locations, seeking an interview with Urick, beginning in early 2014.]
TI: Were you aware of “Serial” before Koenig contacted you?
KU: I had heard of her.
TI: So when did you talk to her?
KU: I didn’t talk to her. I got an email, like I said, I think it was the week before the podcast. Which said I’ve got this witness who contacted me who was a witness at trial saying you were upset with the way he testified, and you yelled at him after he got through testifying.
TI: Why did you not speak to Koenig?
KU: At that time, out of respect for the family. This was a young girl killed at about age 18. Terrible blow to the family. When you deal with victims as a prosecutor, sometimes you have to put them through a trial. Sometimes you have to put them through appeals. Sometimes there’s press coverage that you have to expose them to. But this was 14 years after the fact.
I did not want to be responsible for causing any further anguish for the family. And also, I should’ve put this on the record at the beginning, make it very clear I am no longer employed with the Baltimore City State’s Attorney’s Office. I have not been since 2003. So I’m not a spokesman for the office; I’m not a spokesman for the case. I also took the attitude that if the City State’s Attorney’s Office wanted to have a spokesman, that was their business. I was not going to try to be a spokesman for the case. I have no authority to do so.