Judge blames ex-Aspen bartender for sexual assault conviction and denies new trial

[ad_1]

Pierre Nardi

The person who caused Peter Nardi the most harm in his trial seven years ago was not one of his lawyers, but Nardi himself, a district court judge ruled on Friday.

With the exception of an unethical fee agreement that ultimately didn’t impact Nardi’s legal representation, the two defense attorneys in the case actually did a good job. , said Pitkin County District Judge Chris Seldin, who denied Nardi’s request for a new trial because of ineffective assistance from an attorney.

“At the end of the day, it was clearly Mr. Nardi’s own testimony that was most damaging to him during the trial,” Seldin said. “(The prosecution) effectively used all the evidence to prove their story and that clearly convinced the jury.”

A Pitkin County jury convicted Nardi in April 2014 of felony sexual assault, felony attempted sexual assault, two counts of misdemeanor assault, one count of false imprisonment, and a final felony of violation of bail conditions. He is currently serving a nine-year to life sentence in Colorado prison.

Seldin’s ruling capped three and a half days of testimony that took place from Jan. 12-14 and Friday during which Denver-based attorney Nancy Holton tried to convince the judge that Nardi’s defense attorneys, John Van Ness of Carbondale and Colleen Scissors of Basalt, got his trial so wrong he deserved a new one.

Holton alleged that attorneys should have allowed Nardi’s friends to testify about his character during the trial. Seldin, however, said the testimony he heard from those friends earlier this month was “biased” and irrelevant and could have allowed prosecutors to point to Nardi’s previous felony conviction and history of domestic violence. .

Holton also said that Van Ness – since deceased – and Scissors should have retained the services of an investigator and an expert witness to testify in Nardi’s defence. Seldin judged that the absence of an investigator was not detrimental to Nardi. The judge also said the attorneys attempted to hire an expert and that the trial judge in the case correctly applied a direction from the Chief Justice of the Colorado Supreme Court on how to pay the expert.

Holton criticized the attorneys for not pursuing a plea deal in the case. But, again, Seldin cited Nardi’s own behavior — he sought out local reporters and police and steadfastly maintained his innocence — undermined such efforts, he said.

And despite implications that Van Ness may have had alcohol problems during the trial, Seldin praised Van Ness’s motions filed in the case, saying they were of higher quality than what he has. seen in other criminal cases and demonstrated a “depth of detail that I don’t know”. typically see in filings of criminal motions.

“Unfortunate Mr. Van Ness can’t even defend himself because he’s dead,” Seldin said.

The only area of ​​the defense that was unethical was a fee agreement between Van Ness – who took the case for free – and Nardi that stipulated the attorney would get most of any civil suit settlement. in the case once Nardi acquitted, Seldin said.

“I’m going to assume that the fee agreement here created a conflict,” the judge said.

Still, it did not adversely affect Nardi’s representation, so it was not grounds for a new trial based on ineffective assistance from counsel, he said.

Nardi caused his condemnation, Seldin said. His testimony was “devastating” “incredibly damaging” and likely “sunk him”, the judge said.

Scissors – who was no doubt the lead lawyer in the case – thought Nardi would make an excellent and charming witness, but when he took the stand it wasn’t long before she realized what was happening. going on, he said. In an “incredibly bold” move, Scissors tried to stop Nardi’s cross-examination and get him out of the witness box, but former District Judge Gail Nichols rightfully allowed the cross to continue, saying said Seldin.

“She saw her client being killed and she did everything to prevent it,” he said. “She was about as bold as a defense attorney could get.”

In fact, Nardi’s testimony was so bad for his case that Seldin questioned on Friday whether Van Ness and Scissors had decided not to call an expert witness during the trial in order to create the basis for an ineffective motion for assistance. a lawyer for a new trial later.

Seldin said he expects Nardi’s case to be appealed to the Colorado Court of Appeals.

“I’m sure this is the first step of this motion,” he said.

All participants in Friday’s hearing, including Nardi, attended virtually. The case was scheduled to end on January 18, although Nardi was unable to attend because the Colorado Department of Corrections said he tested positive for COVID-19.

On Friday, Nardi said he had never tested positive for the virus, despite being kept in quarantine.

Nardi has served eight years in prison and cannot be released until he admits to the sexual assault and completes an intensive sex offender rehabilitation program. His former public defender says Nardi, who has maintained his innocence, will have to stay in prison for life or lie about his true feelings, although completing the treatment program requires taking a lie detector test.

[ad_2]