20140214.bob-lola.autobee# 1775020 v 1

8/12/2019 20140214.Bob-Lola.Autobee# 1775020 v 1

1/5


2/5

From my perspective, a man who intentionally kills his 11-week old infant daughter is already ina unique class of murderers. That act alone is an aggravating factor under our laws, which wouldhave made Montour eligible for the death penalty for the murder of his daughter. The

prosecutors in that murder case his first murder case did not seek a death sentence. Instead,Montour pleaded guilty to his heinous act of infanticide and was sentenced to life in prison

without the possibility of parole.

As you know, while serving that life sentence, Montour attacked your unsuspecting son from behind like a coward and killed him with repeated blows to his head. He knew exactly whathe was doing and his motives were selfish. You also remember Montours cold -blooded wordsafter he murdered your son and in court. For your sons killer, remorse and apologies came acouple weeks before this trial and will be used to try to convince a jury to give him yet anothershot at a life sentence after his second murder of an innocent person.

Of the compelling evidence I reviewed in making this decision, I reviewed Montours poems,letters, and statements at his first sentencing hearing. I have attached a copy of the transcript

with this correspondence, so you have the opportunity to see what information I have considered.A couple of the notable statements by Montour at this sentencing hearing are:

the evidence has clearly shown my thought process within the contextof my problem-solving skills and in other areas of my life and howlittle I value human life, along with my total disregard as to thepunishment and deterrence the laws are to invoke.

I believe it is self-evident that if I am to receive another lifesentence, it would afford me yet another opportunity to kill again, aswell as an opportunity to educate inmates how to manipulate the law, toessentially get away with murder, given the existing capital sentencing

statute.

There can be no guaranteed sentence to administrative segregation.

I am concerned that you have been misled about the possible sentence Montour could serve, if hedoes not receive a death sentence. You have mentioned to me and I have heard misstated tothe media by the handful of vo cal defenders of your sons murderer that Montour is willing toserve life in administrative segregation, publicly referred to as solitary confinement. Thissentence is not possible. Under our laws and the rules of the Department of Corrections, no

person can be sentenced even by their own agreement and stipulation to a life sentence in

solitary confinement. The law does not permit this. Anyone who tells you that such a deal can be negotiated is ignorant or intentionally misleading you. This is not a debatable issue. It is thestatus of our law. If you want to seek an independent opinion about this, I encourage you toreach out to the Department of Corrections and ask for yourself.

If Montour is permitted to plead guilty, or a jury does not sentence him to death, he will besentenced to life in prison without parole...with no additional limitations on where he must behoused, or the conditions of his sentence. That means that short of a death sentence, there is


3/5

nothing that prevents Montour from progressing back to general population, back to the privileges of any other one-time murderer, back to the very cell he lived in the day he chose tomurder your son, potentially placing other inmates and prison guards in grave danger.

However, a person sentenced to death is required by law to be housed in administrative

segregation until his sentence is carried out. This is the only sentence that will hold someone insolitary confinement until their sentence is fulfilled.

It is an injustice for the murderer of a helpless infant to subsequently murder an unsuspecting prison guard and the only consequence to that repeat killer is a temporary change in scenery andthe place of his confinement.

One of the additional things I must consider is how the re solution of Montours case may impactthose currently-incarcerated murderers who might seek to kill another prison guard--anotherEric. As a former career corrections officer, I ask you to consider what message what sign you would like to see posted in prisons throughout Colorado:

If you murder a corrections officer, your sentence will be little different than the one youcurrently serve.

Or, If you murder a corrections officer, you will likely face the loss of your life.

The cost of this case

I am also concerned that you have been misled about the cost of this case. Whoever tells you ithas or will cost $15 million should be able to provide you the proof of that. Theycannot. There are no prosecutors in our office who were hired specifically for this case. Whenthis case is concluded, the prosecutors and paralegal positions currently assigned to this case willstill be here. The extra cost of this case is caused by Montours efforts to minimize theresponsibility he is willing take in this case. In evaluating who is responsible for any expense inthis case, I respectfully encourage you to look at who is responsible for the delays that haveoccurred in this case and who continues to resist responsibility for their conduct. Any increasedcosts to this case have taken place prior to this trial and are a direct result of the efforts to forceour office to re- prove his guilt, not just in the case of your sons murder, but also in his previouscase of murdering his infant daughter.

From the first hours we spent at your home in Pueblo, I have sincerely listened to your thoughts,concerns, and interests in this case. I have answered your questions as fully and candidly as

possible. I, too, have been candid with you about my thoughts and interests in this case. Icontinue to believe that justice dictates that Montour receive a sentence for killing your sonabove and beyond the life sentence he earned for murdering his daughter. That sentence isdeath. Anything less would diminish Montours ev il conduct and its impact on this community,the Department of Corrections, and your family. My obligations also include this communityand the families of future victims of murderers like Montour, who will be further undeterredfrom killing another corrections officer in the future if they know that no additional punishment


4/5

will result from their murderous conduct. Nobody should again endure what Montour has forcedyou and your family to endure.

This same analysis and conclusion has been reached by President Obamas Justice Departmenthere in Colorado. The U.S. Attorneys office is seeking a death sentence in a prison murder

case. In that case, the victim is not a corrections officer, but another inmate.

The integrity of the justice system

I am aware that you have invested time and effort into voicing your objections to the death penalty directly to the media and to the potential jurors in the case against your sons killer. Irespect your right to do that. I have taken no steps to prevent you from doing so. I value yourconstitutional rights even when they are exercised in opposition to my attempts at achieving whatI sincerely believe is the appropriate sentence in this case.

My concern, which I raise to you for your consideration, is that your efforts may negativelyimpact the fair administration of justice in this case. I am certain that you agree that jurorsshould base their decisions about guilt or innocence in this case only upon the evidence and lawthey receive in court. Your efforts to influence them outside of the courtroom could jeopardizethose jurors ability to remain fair and impartial throughout this lengthy trial. I am certain thatyou do not want to negatively impact the jurys ability to decide fairly whether Montourmurdered your son.

Your participation in this case

I am committed to your exercise of the rights afforded you under our constitution and laws inthis case. I encourage you to participate in the courtroom and on the witness stand as much asthe law will permit. The hearing yesterday has been deliberately characterized by those whoseek to save the life of your sons murderer as an attempt to muzzle you or prevent you fromtestifying. That is not true. You have heard the arguments in court and we will provide you withthe pleadings on this issue, if you have not yet reviewed them. You know that our position isthat the law places one limitation on the substance of a victims testimony to the jury in thesentencing phase of a death penalty case: they cannot tell the jury what sentence they want tosee whether that sentence is life or death. Our position on this issue would be the same even ifyou changed your mind and again supported a death sentence for Montour.

It is clear from the arguments of Montours att orneys in writing and in court that their vigorousand vocal support of your right to testify is limited to your testimony being favorable to Montouron the issue of life or death. If you chose to again support death for Montour a decision youare not obligated to make or to reveal to anyone, his attorneys would likely just as vigorously andvocally oppose your testimony.

This case will likely last a couple months. I would like to meet with you and your family at yourearliest convenience to continue our ongoing discussion about this case. As I have done over the


5/5

past year, I remain available to speak with you as a family, or individually you can always talkwith me one-on-one. I remain open to hearing considering your thoughts and interests in thisimportant case.

Very respectfully,

George H. BrauchlerDistrict Attorney

20140214.bob-lola.autobee# 1775020 v 1

Documents