Federal prosecutors urged a veteran judge Thursday to recuse himself from the death penalty trial of admitted serial killer Gary Lee Sampson, a case he has overseen for 14 years, saying the judge’s professional relationship with a new witness poses the appearance of a conflict of interest.
The request for the judge to step down —
Sampson, now 55, pleaded guilty a decade ago to the 2001 carjacking and killing of three people in Massachusetts and New Hampshire over several days, and Wolf sentenced him to death after a jury voted in favor of the penalty. But the judge ordered a new trial in 2011 after discovering that one of the initial jurors in the case lied. The case is scheduled for a new trial in September.
Wolf and Gilligan were both on a Martha’s Vineyard Film Society panel in 2014 related to the screening of “The Life and Mind of Mark DeFriest,” a documentary that highlights the woes of America’s prison systems. Wolf also had Gilligan over to his Martha’s Vineyard home for lobster rolls prior to the screening and panel.
Following an investigation into the relationship by the top assistant in the US attorney’s office, prosecutors alleged in a 29-page motion Thursday that the film screening and panel discussion “addressed issues relevant to this case in a manner that was not designed to be balanced,” bringing into question the judge’s ability to keep the appearance of impartiality in the trial — one of the thresholds that would force him to step aside.
At the panel discussion, Wolf called Gilligan “one of the world’s two leading experts” on prison issues — a topic he could testify about at Sampson’s trial.
Sampson’s lawyers allege the abuse he suffered during his years in prison exacerbated a severe mental illness that contributed to his crimes, what they call mitigating factors, or reasons that Sampson should not be sentenced to death.
“A disinterested member of the public, fully informed of the facts, would have a reasonable question as to the Court’s impartiality in this matter,” the prosecutors argued in the Thursday evening filing, noting that Wolf himself has said he would not have participated in the panel discussion had he known Gilligan would be called to testify as a witness in Sampson’s trial.
Assistant US Attorney John McNeil, the second-in-command in the US attorney’s office in Boston, interviewed several people familiar with the screening, including the filmmaker, who confirmed that Wolf had acknowledged at the time that he had to be cautious in his statements because he was handling a case with issues similar to those raised in the film.
“The court did not simply moderate a panel discussion of a topic of current interest, but rather a panel discussion that addressed issues that are central to Sampson’s defense in the case,” prosecutors argued.
Wolf first disclosed last month that he had a professional relationship with Gilligan after learning that he may be called as a defense witness.
Wolf also acknowledged that Gilligan had years earlier filed an affidavit supporting Sampson’s defense during the lengthy appeals process, but said he did not recall the affidavit when he agreed to be on the panel with Gilligan, and did not think it was important to raise the issue until he learned Gilligan could be called to testify as a witness.
Federal prosecutors raised concerns that the relationship could pose an appearance of a conflict of interest, an issue Sampson could later use in an appeal.
The unusual request by prosecutors adds yet another twist to the case, one of only three death-penalty cases to go to trial in Massachusetts in modern history.
Federal prosecutors and relatives of Sampson’s victims lashed out at the judge for ordering a new death penalty trial in 2011, though a federal appeals court upheld the decision.
The victims’ relatives have also accused Wolf of being against the death penalty. Wolf has said that any decisions he makes are based solely on the law and Sampson’s right to a fair trial.
At a recent court hearing, Wolf said he spoke on the film panel to support a young family friend, the filmmaker, Gabriel London. Wolf said he made it clear at the time that his participation on the panel did not constitute an endorsement of the film.
Federal prosecutors asked Wolf to rule on the request without a hearing, though they did not set a time frame. A status hearing in the case had already been scheduled for August.
Sampson’s lawyers have previously said they would oppose any requests for Wolf to step down. They had not yet responded to the prosecution’s filing Thursday night.
Milton J. Valencia can be reached at milton.valencia@globe.com.