After several name changes over the years, NDAA’s annual spring conference will revert to its original name this year, the Metro Conference. But don’t let the name deter you from attending if you are from a smaller jurisdiction, because—and I want to emphasize this—all prosecutors, regardless of the size of their jurisdictions, are not only welcome but are encouraged to attend. The conference is scheduled for May 16-18 at the historic Hotel Washington, which literally overlooks the White House. The program format has been revised to place more emphasis on nuts-and-bolts issues of concern to all prosecutors, irrespective of jurisdiction size.
The conference theme will be “Fighting the Terror Within: The Realities of Prosecuting Domestic Terrorism.” Although there will be VIP speakers, the emphasis will be on how local prosecutors are dealing with this problem, with plenty of time allowed for prosecutors to visit with their members of Congress to discuss issues of concern to us all. A more detailed description of the conference appears on page 7.
There is no better example of domestic terrorism and the common issues facing prosecutors of disparate jurisdictions than the so-called Washington, DC-area sniper case. Over a period of three weeks in October 2002, seemingly random sniper attacks across two states (Maryland and Virginia) and the District of Columbia killed 10 persons and wounded three, terrorizing the area. There is also evidence that the same persons were involved in shootings in Alabama and Louisiana. After two suspects, John Allen Muhammad, 41, and John Lee Malvo, 17, were captured, it fell to U.S. Attorney General John Ashcroft to decide who (state or federal) would prosecute them and where.
Since one of the sniper shootings took place in the nation’s capital, AG Ashcroft could have assumed federal jurisdiction and appointed a U.S. attorney to prosecute the case. Instead, he chose Virginia as the venue and selected two veteran Virginia prosecutors—one in a large metropolitan jurisdiction and the other in a largely rural jurisdiction—each to try one of the defendants.
The attorney general could not have chosen two better or different types of prosecutors: Robert F. Horan, Jr., 70, commonwealth’s attorney of metropolitan and populous Fairfax County for the last 35 years, and Paul B. Ebert, 65, commonwealth’s attorney of largely rural Prince William County who has served as long as Horan has been Fairfax County’s top prosecutor. Both are similar in that they have successfully prosecuted dozens of death penalty cases. They are close friends and often go fishing together.
Bob Horan’s Fairfax County jurisdiction is Washington, DC’s largest suburb, with a population of approximately one million. Because of its proximity to the nation’s capital, it has more high profile cases with national and international impact than the average county. For example: Bob Horan prosecuted Mir Aimal Kansi, a Pakistani national, for shooting to death two CIA employees and wounding three others outside CIA headquarters in 1993. Kansi was convicted and executed.
A former marine and an NDAA vice president, Horan has a tough-as-nails approach that can intimidate a defense attorney or witness unfamiliar with his unrelenting style. J. Bruce Bach, a former Fairfax County circuit court judge, once worked for Horan as his chief deputy. He calls Horan “the best trial lawyer I have ever seen,” and recalls, in a widely repeated anecdote, a courtroom showdown between Horan and a team of high-priced lawyers. “You see these three lawyers walk in,” he said, “good lawyers, with a suitcase full of papers and law books. Then Horan will walk in with a pencil and yellow pad. He goes in, and he beats them to death.”
Paul Ebert’s Prince William County jurisdiction is much less populous (about 300,000 residents) than Bob Horan’s and is, like its chief prosecutor, more low key. Nevertheless, as those who know Paul Ebert, and especially defense attorneys who have faced him, will tell you, “Don’t let that fool you.”
Ebert takes a folksier, down-home approach with juries, seeming to converse with them informally rather than formally addressing them. His approach works as effectively in his county as Bob Horan’s hard-line approach works in his. Colleagues call him “a tiger.” Paul Ebert has prosecuted many complex high-profile death penalty cases and has sent more criminals to death row than any other commonwealth’s attorney in Virginia.
Even with their impressive experience, the Baltimore Sun reported before the so-called sniper trials began, “Horan and Ebert have never faced such a challenge. Their every move will be dissected by legal experts, and millions of people will be hanging on each courtroom motion and maneuver to see what happens to the defendants in one of the nation’s most notorious serial killing rampages.”
Bob Horan and Paul Ebert met the challenge. Facing cases of unusual complexity, with the national spotlight on them, they each put on a flawless, textbook performance in their respective trials. The tenacious chief prosecutor of one of the nation’s largest jurisdictions and the seemingly easygoing chief prosecutor of one of the smaller jurisdictions, each drawing on his experience, resources and prosecutorial skills.
In both cases, the juries found the defendants guilty on all counts, including capital murder.
These trials demonstrate, among other things, that jurisdictional size is often irrelevant when it comes to meeting common prosecutorial situations. And that’s why prosecutors from jurisdictions of all sizes should attend the Metro Conference in May.
