Interview of Aramis Ayala

Case 6:17-cv-00649-CEM-TBS Document 1-3 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 30 PageID 29
EXHIBIT 3
1
HARRIS, WILTSHIRE & GRANNIS, LLP

1919 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
+ + + + +
INTERVIEW
of
ARAMIS AYALA
Florida State Attorney
Ninth Judicial Court
by
WFTV Channel 9
+ + + + +
Wednesday,
March 15, 2017
+ + + + +
This transcript was produced from
audio provided by WFTV Channel 9.
Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc.

(202) 234-4433 Washington DC www.nealrgross.com
2
1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S
2 (Time not provided.)
3 MS. AYALA: Good morning. I would
4 like to address how my office will be handling
5 death penalty cases going forward.
6 In just over a year Florida's death
7 penalty statute was twice been ruled
8 unconstitutional. A new statute was enacted this
9 past Tuesday morning. That is Florida's second
10 death penalty statute in less than two years.
11 I've thoroughly reviewed the newly
12 passed statute and relevant legal decisions
13 relating to Florida's death penalty. As a state
14 attorney I took an oath to support, protect and
15 defend the Constitution and the American Bar
16 Association Rules of Professional Conduct outline
17 my duties as a prosecutor. My duty is to seek
18 justice, which is fairness, objectivity and
19 decency. I am to seek reform and improve the
20 administration of criminal justice. I am
21 prohibited from making the severity of sentences
22 the index of my effectiveness.

3
1 Deciding when and if to seek death
2 penalty is one of the most important decisions I
3 will have to make in my capacity as state
4 attorney. It is a serious decision with grave
5 consequences for victims' families, for this
6 community and for defendants and their families.
7 I have given this issue extensive and
8 painstaking thought and consideration. What has
9 become abundantly clear through this process is
10 that while I currently do have discretion to
11 pursue death sentences, I have determined that
12 doing so is not in the best interest of this
13 community or the best interest of justice.
14 After careful review and consideration
15 of the new statute under my administration I will
16 not be seeking death penalty in the cases handled
17 in my office. Let me very clear, however, I will
18 continue to hold people who do harm to this
19 community accountable for their actions. I will
20 do so in a way that is sensible, fair and just.
21 Florida's death penalty has been the
22 cause of considerable legal chaos, uncertainty

4
1 and turmoil. And analysis of death penalty must
2 be pragmatic. It must be realistic and not
3 simply theoretical, impulsive or emotional. I
4 had to answer difficult questions as I arrived at
5 this decision.
6 Is it practical? Does it make sense?
7 And most importantly, is it evidence-based?
8 After review and study of death penalty, I have
9 found the following facts that undergird my
10 decision not to seek death penalty:
11 Number one, death penalty has no
12 public safety benefit. There is no evidence that
13 death sentences actually protect the public. A
14 comprehensive review of research in the area of
15 death penalty over 34 years was conducted by a
16 committee of the American National Academy of
17 Sciences National Review Council. The committee
18 concluded, and I quote, "The research to date on
19 the effective of capital punishment on homicide
20 is not informative about whether capital
21 punishment decreases, increases or has no effect
22 on homicide cases." I'm sorry, "homicide rates."

5
1 Number two, the death penalty does not
2 increase safety for law enforcement officers,
3 which was a priority for me before I made this
4 decisions. Despite my efforts I have been unable
5 to find any credible evidence that suggests death
6 penalty increases safety for law enforcement
7 officers.
8 I did find, however, a national death
9 penalty study which found the presence of absence
10 of death penalty has no bearings on law
11 enforcement deaths by homicide. That same study
12 found states that had ended death penalty tended
13 to have fewer law enforcement deaths by homicide
14 after their states ended the death penalty.
15 According to that study the deadliest states for
16 law enforcement officers are all states that have
17 actively used death penalty, including Florida.
18 Number three, the death penalty
19 generally is not a deterrent. Deterrance must
20 not only consider severity, but also certainty
21 and frequency. Neither describe death penalty in
22 this state. Death penalty is used too rarely to

6
1 say that it is a true deterrent. Punishment is
2 most effective when it happens consistently and
3 swiftly. Neither describe death penalty in this
4 state.
5 The average death row inmate waits 12 years
6 between sentencing and execution, some up to more
7 than 30 years. The FBI Uniform Crime Report
8 shows that while the south, including Florida,
9 accounts for around 80 percent of executions, we
10 also have the highest murder rate. This does not
11 describe deterrance.
12 Number four, false promises of death
13 penalty gives families no closure. Some victims
14 will support and some will surely oppose my
15 decision, but I have learned that death penalty
16 traps many victims, families in decades-long
17 cycle of uncertainly, court hearings, appeals and
18 waiting. They are left waiting for an execution
19 -- some are waiting for an execution that may
20 never occur. I cannot in good faith look a
21 victim's family in the face and promise that a
22 death sentence handed down in our courts will

7
1 ever result in execution.
2 And finally, number five, the death
3 penalty costs millions of dollars that far
4 outweigh the cost of life in prison sentences.
5 According to the Florida Department of
6 Corrections it costs $53.49 a day, or $19,577 per
7 year to house an inmate in Florida prisons. The
8 American Bar Association has reported that in
9 Florida a death sentence case costs approximately
10 $2.5 million more than a life sentence. It has
11 been noted that Florida spends upward of $51
12 million per year to impose and implement death
13 penalty. By not deciding to pursue death in a
14 handful of cases we can spend more time pursuing
15 justice in many more cases.
16 I do understand that this is a
17 controversial issue, but what is not
18 controversial is the evidence that led me to my
19 decision. If I require the attorneys in my
20 office to manage cases, their individual cases
21 based upon evidence, I must follow the same
22 evidence-based approach when I implement

8
1 policies.
2 My commitment to this community is to
3 pursue justice in a way that ensures
4 accountability, fairness and integrity. By
5 choosing to seek life sentences over death we can
6 assure that violent offenders will never be
7 released. They will never continue to drain
8 resources from the state with decades of appeals.
9 And we can offer families of the victims more
10 closure and more certainty. I'm steadfast that
11 the implementation of this policy is consistent
12 with my duty as the elected state attorney for
13 this circuit and it is in the best interest of
14 this community and in the best interest of
15 justice.
16 REPORTER: Legal experts that we have
17 spoken to say this blanket position goes against
18 state law, so under what legal authority do you
19 have to make a decision as state attorney?
20 MS. AYALA: The Florida law gives me
21 the discretion under the statute of pursuing
22 death penalty, that I have the discretion of

9
1 whether or not to see it.
2 REPORTER: You said this will allow
3 you to pursue other cases, yet just last night
4 your office dropped two cases that were connected
5 to the Markeith Loyd case (inaudible). Can you
6 say how this allows you to pursue other cases if
7 these are not going to be prosecuted (inaudible)?
8 (Simultaneous speaking.)
9 MS. AYALA: We can have more staff.
10 We can have more cases staffed by more people.
11 It allows us more resources to be able to respond
12 to it versus using the resources to attempt to
13 kill individuals.
14 REPORTER: What about those two cases
15 that were just dropped, though?
16 MS. AYALA: It allows us the
17 opportunity to have individual attorneys to seek
18 out the facts of those cases and make a
19 determination versus waiting and waiting and
20 waiting, setting court dates and utilizing court
21 resources and wasting time.

10
1 REPORTER: This decision is something
2 the (inaudible) and (inaudible) have spoken on
3 (inaudible) decision. How do you plan to
4 maintain a good working relationship with law
5 enforcement after this announcement?
6 MS. AYALA: Well, I understand that
7 law enforcement may be upset, and I did speak to
8 Chief Mina. I will discuss with him the further
9 details of the evidence that I have absolutely
10 considered law enforcement. I appreciate what
11 they do. We need law enforcement. Their job is
12 not a safe one, which is why my priority is to
13 make certain that the sentences we are seeking
14 are actually not because we're emotional, but
15 they actually are evidence-based, that they are
16 supporting more safety for law enforcement
17 officers.
19 REPORTER: (Inaudible) three weeks ago
20 that you were asking your staff to undergo a
21 review of the death penalty. Is this the result
22 of that review and how much of this was their

11
1 recommend and how much of this was your decision
2 based on your belief system?
3 MS. AYALA: What I did is I absolutely
4 started with the point of are we going to pursue
5 death penalty? Is there a way that we can be
6 consistent in this office? Do we agree with this
7 policy as being consistent, as being evidence-
8 based? And I arrived at the decision that it is
9 not proper for this office to seek justice and
10 actually enforce this particular one. So we
11 looked at the policies and moved forward and I
12 made a decision.
13 REPORTER: Sounds like this is
14 something that (inaudible) deep within you. I'm
15 wondering whether this should have been a bigger
16 issue in your campaign last year. Did people ask
17 you about your position on death penalty? Were
18 you this forthcoming?
19 MS. AYALA: At the time that I was
20 campaigning death penalty was in that flux. It
21 has created -- brought us to this position.
22 While I maybe -- have my personal feelings; and

12
1 most people have their personal feelings about
2 death penalty, when I'm in the position of state
3 attorney, I have to eliminate my personal
4 feelings and pursue whether or not the evidence
5 supports my decision. And I believe that it
6 does.
7 REPORTER: When you applied to the
8 position for the major (inaudible) back in fall
9 of 2015, Jeff Axune (phonetic) says you were very
10 specifically asked your position on the death
11 penalty. At that point in time you told him you
12 had no qualm of pursuing the death penalty. In
13 fact, he describes the first capital case you got
14 So what has changed between then and
15 now and does this $1.4 million contribution have
16 anything to do with your stance?
17 MS. AYALA: I can tell you what has
18 changed, is I'm no longer an assistant state
19 attorney. I'm the state attorney. And it
20 requires another level of accountability. I am
21 required to consider policy, not an individual
22 case. It is my responsibility to make a

13
1 determination of whether or not this is justice
2 for this community, not individual cases.
3 There may be cases, even active ones,
4 that I think death penalty may be appropriate
5 because of the egregiousness of the offense. I
6 have to also consider the other things that I
7 just listed previously in my statement.
8 REPORTER: Does that mean you're going
9 to --
10 REPORTER: You were quoted last month
11 as saying that you wanted to see how this all
12 played out with the death penalty (inaudible).
13 It sounds from what you're saying today that you
14 really had already made your decision.
15 MS. AYALA: It may sound like that.
16 I can assure you I have not made my decision,
17 because when I took office on January 3rd, within
18 two days there was another ruling from the
19 Supreme Court regarding death penalty followed by
20 other issues, other orders issued from the death
21 penalty. This has been an inconsistent system
22 since I took office. And now the governor signed

14
1 a statute that is in place, but it has gone on.
2 And each time something has come up, I have had
3 to consider everything before I move forward.
4 I have now considered everything since
5 the statute has been enacted. It would be
6 premature for me to take a position before a
7 statute has been enacted.
9 REPORTER: Is there anything that can
10 make you change your mind?
11 MS. AYALA: If there was a possibility
12 that we could speed up the process, not drag
13 victims through this process where it's grueling,
14 if we could eliminate the cost that citizens have
15 to go through, if we could do those things, I
16 would absolutely feel that it would be properly
17 administered, and if I believed or I had any
18 credible evidence that it caused more harm on
19 this community or the wonderful law enforcement
20 officers who serve us, I would absolutely change
21 my mind.
22 REPORTER: (Inaudible) death penalty

15
1 (inaudible) --
3 REPORTER: (Inaudible) Master Sergeant
4 Clayton's family about your decision to not seek
5 the death penalty in this case?
6 MS. AYALA: I did. I reached out to
7 her husband yesterday. Unfortunately, I did not
8 have an opportunity to speak to every victim's
9 family who this decision has impacted because of
10 circumstances beyond my control. Before I had
11 made the announcement it was my intent out of
12 respect for the victims to speak to every single
13 family.
15 REPORTER: What was the response that
16 you were getting from Master Sergeant Clayton's
17 family in regards to not seeking the death
18 penalty in this case, the family members that you
19 were able to speak to?
20 MS. AYALA: They understood where I
21 was coming from. I outlined the things that I
22 outlined here. Someone may disagree with it, but

16
1 they understand I did not arrive at this
2 arbitrarily or emotionally.
3 REPORTER: What would it mean for the
4 pending death penalty cases now --
6 REPORTER: -- (inaudible)?
7 MS. AYALA: I'm sorry. I'll get right
8 with you.
9 Yes?
10 REPORTER: What is the nature of the
11 cases under appeal as well as cases that might be
12 getting (inaudible)?
13 MS. AYALA: When it comes to the
14 mandates -- are you talking about the re-
15 sentencing cases?
16 REPORTER: (No audible response.)
17 MS. AYALA: I haven't received a
18 mandate from the Supreme Court. I will deal with
19 those on a case-by-case basis because I have to
20 follow the rules of the Supreme Court. While it
21 -- I have a responsibility to enforce the law
22 justly, I have a responsibility to follow orders

17
1 from the Supreme Court, which I will never
2 hesitate to do.
3 REPORTER: Is there any other
4 jurisdiction --
6 REPORTER: (Inaudible) pending death
7 penalty cases in the jurisdiction, about five or
8 six that were filed under the previous
9 administration. Do you plan to file a Notice to
10 Withdraw the intent to seek the death penalty in
11 those cases that have not yet gone to trial?
12 MS. AYALA: I do. I've spoken to the
13 attorneys assigned to those cases, the victim
14 advocates and the families.
15 REPORTER: Is there any other
16 jurisdiction in the State of Florida where jurors
17 would not have the option to decide the fate of
18 someone like Loyd in this case?
19 MS. AYALA: I'm not sure.
21 REPORTER: Obviously this case is
22 affecting Markeith Loyd's case as well. I want

18
1 to ask you, did you plan to file charges against
2 the officers of OPD who had used force against
3 Markeith Loyd in that case?
4 MS. AYALA: That's still under
5 investigation.
6 REPORTER: Aren't you taking something
7 off the table when you're trying -- when you or
8 the police are trying to negotiate with a suspect
9 for information if you take away the possibility
10 they may be facing the death penalty?
11 MS. AYALA: When it comes to
12 negotiation, I think we as prosecutors have a
13 responsibility to negotiate. One thing that I
14 think is inhumane is to negotiate life.
15 REPORTER: George Soros (phonetic)
16 contributed more than a half a million dollars to
17 your campaign. What is his stance on the death
18 penalty would you say that influenced your
19 decision in any way?
20 MS. AYALA: I would say that you have
21 to speak directly to Mr. Soros, which I have not,
22 about his position. What I can tell you is that

19
1 I owe the citizens of this community the things
2 that I told them on the campaign, which was my
3 promises, criminal justice reform, integrity,
4 humanity, all of the things. And most
5 importantly that all my decisions as I made
6 policy would be evidence-based, which this is.
7 REPORTER: Do you see any exception
8 (inaudible)?
9 MS. AYALA: I see concern. I see
10 opportunities where if death penalty was an
11 option for me as a state attorney, if all of the
12 things that you've talked about -- that you asked
13 me earlier if anything could change it. I see
14 cases that they've -- they absolutely deserve
15 death penalty, but a case that may deserve it
16 because we feel that way must be supported by a
17 statute that is -- can be justly administered and
18 enforced. That's the issue.
20 REPORTER: (inaudible) Markeith Loyd
21 case though is more than just a feeling. Our
22 legal experts say the aggravating factors in

20
1 Markeith Loyd's case do call for the death
2 penalty. And so that they say the law is behind
3 (inaudible) the death penalty in this case, not
4 just emotion.
5 MS. AYALA: And that's their
6 interpretation.
8 REPORTER: (Inaudible) directly tied
9 to your $1.4 million (inaudible)?
10 MS. AYALA: I tell them the same thing
11 that I just told the other reporter, and that is
12 that my obligation is to the citizens of this
13 community and the promises that I made regarding
14 my ability to be humane, to engage in criminal
15 justice reform, to be accountable for my
16 decisions, to be ethically sound and follow the
17 ABA rules of my responsibilities.
18 REPORTER: (Inaudible) alleges that
19 (inaudible) death penalty (inaudible), would you
20 change your mind?
21 MS. AYALA: If the death penalty
22 system was one that again did not drag out for

21
1 years and years, decades and decades, if the
2 death penalty was one that didn't take victims'
3 families through this whole entire process, if
4 the death penalty had all the concerns, we would
5 revisit this issue.
7 REPORTER: Can you just clarify, you
8 just said a second ago that the main issue is the
9 death penalty statute, but then you outlined five
10 reasons why you personally don't like it. Which
11 is the overriding concern for you, the statute or
12 the five things you outlined?
13 MS. AYALA: Allow me to correct you.
14 I did not identify any personal reasons that I
15 don't like it. I identified the basis, the
16 logical basis, my research, my study and my
17 reflection dealing with deterrance, which is not
18 an opinion; dealing with victims' families, which
19 is not an opinion; dealing with public safety,
20 which is not an opinion; dealing with public law
21 -- with law enforcement officer, with is -- which
22 is not an opinion.

22
1 When you ask me the question which one
2 is it, it is my ability to enforce the statute,
3 which is my requirement, under the law to do it
4 in a just way. There is no justice when victims
5 are being misled about an end that I doubt will
6 occur.
7 REPORTER: This is nothing
8 (inaudible) --
10 REPORTER: (Inaudible) --
11 REPORTER: -- prior to your run for
12 office? Because again, voters probably should
13 have known that this may be your decision.
14 MS. AYALA: Again, death penalty was
15 not even a legitimate sentence at that time.
16 Death penalty could not be pursued while I was
17 running for office.
18 REPORTER: But you knew it could be,
19 so you hadn't given it any thought or research
20 prior to running for office?
21 MS. AYALA: Absolutely I gave it
22 thought. I mean, and as an assistant state

23
1 attorney, that's one of the issues is that we
2 continue to think that we've arrived at a level
3 of professionalism or a level of success when
4 we're able to pursue a death case. That is not
5 humane and that is not consistent with how we
6 should pursue justice.
7 So in order -- because I have that
8 concern, I absolutely make certain that if we're
9 going to pursue this, it needs to be something
10 that is necessary, something that is consistent,
11 something that is a deterrent, something that
12 increases public safety.
13 REPORTER: Shouldn't others have known
14 that though that you had that concern prior to?
15 MS. AYALA: I mean, they -- all voters
16 know now.
17 REPORTER: To be very clear, will your
18 office no longer be pursuing cap cases that you
19 (inaudible)?
20 MS. AYALA: That is correct.
21 PARTICIPANT: Two more questions.
22 REPORTER: Not two hours ago the House

24
1 of Representatives Committee (inaudible)
2 impeachment of state attorneys. I'm wondering if
3 you have any thoughts (inaudible) or whether that
4 anybody has suggested that you are (inaudible).
5 MS. AYALA: That has not been
6 suggested to me. What I can tell you, as I said
7 in my original statement, I believe that I am
8 following the Constitution as well as the ABA
9 rules that outline my responsibilities as a
10 prosecutor, which is what undergird my decision
11 as well as the other things that I discussed.
12 PARTICIPANT: (Inaudible). All right.
13 Thank you all.
14 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter
15 went off the record.)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22

25
A attorneys 7:19 9:17 Channel 1:9,22 cycle 6:17

ABA 20:17 24:8 17:13 24:2 chaos 3:22
audible 16:16 charges 18:1 D
ability 20:14 22:2
able 9:11 15:19 23:4 audio 1:22 Chief 10:8 D.C 1:2
above-entitled 24:14 authority 8:18 choosing 8:5 date 4:18
absence 5:9 average 6:5 circuit 8:13 dates 9:20
absolutely 10:9 11:3 Axune 12:9 circumstances 15:10 day 7:6
14:16,20 19:14 22:21 AYALA 1:6 2:3 8:20 9:9 citizens 14:14 19:1 days 13:18
23:8 9:16 10:6 11:3,19 20:12 deadliest 5:15
abundantly 3:9 12:17 13:15 14:11 clarify 21:7 deal 16:18
Academy 4:16 15:6,20 16:7,13,17 Clayton's 15:4,16 dealing 21:17,18,19,20
accountability 8:4 17:12,19 18:4,11,20 clear 3:9,17 23:17 death 2:5,6,10,13 3:1
12:20 19:9 20:5,10,21 21:13 closure 6:13 8:10 3:11,16,21 4:1,8,10
accountable 3:19 20:15 22:14,21 23:15,20 come 14:2 4:11,13,15 5:1,5,8,10
accounts 6:9 24:5 comes 16:13 18:11 5:12,14,17,18,21,22
actions 3:19 coming 15:21 6:3,5,12,15,22 7:2,9
B commitment 8:2 7:12,13 8:5,22 10:21
active 13:3
actively 5:17 back 12:8 committee 4:16,17 24:1 11:5,17,20 12:2,10,12
address 2:4 Bar 2:15 7:8 community 3:6,13,19 13:4,12,19,20 14:22
administered 14:17 based 7:21 11:2,8 8:2,14 13:2 14:19 15:5,17 16:4 17:6,10
19:17 basis 16:19 21:15,16 19:1 20:13 18:10,17 19:10,15
administration 2:20 bearings 5:10 comprehensive 4:14 20:1,3,19,21 21:2,4,9
3:15 17:9 belief 11:2 concern 19:9 21:11 22:14,16 23:4
advocates 17:14 believe 12:5 24:7 23:8,14 deaths 5:11,13
aggravating 19:22 believed 14:17 concerns 21:4 decades 8:8 21:1,1
ago 10:19 21:8 23:22 benefit 4:12 concluded 4:18 decades-long 6:16
agree 11:6 best 3:12,13 8:13,14 Conduct 2:16 decency 2:19
alleges 20:18 beyond 15:10 conducted 4:15 decide 17:17
allow 9:2 21:13 bigger 11:15 connected 9:4 deciding 3:1 7:13
allows 9:6,11,16 blanket 8:17 consequences 3:5 decision 3:4 4:5,10
American 2:15 4:16 7:8 brought 11:21 consider 5:20 12:21 6:15 7:19 8:19 10:1,3
analysis 4:1 13:6 14:3 11:1,8,12 12:5 13:14
announcement 10:5 C considerable 3:22 13:16 15:4,9 18:19
15:11 call 20:1 consideration 3:8,14 22:13 24:10
answer 4:4 campaign 11:16 18:17 considered 10:10 14:4 decisions 2:12 3:2 5:4
anybody 24:4 19:2 consistent 8:11 11:6,7 19:5 20:16
appeal 16:11 campaigning 11:20 23:5,10 decreases 4:21
appeals 6:17 8:8 cap 23:18 consistently 6:2 deep 11:14
applied 12:7 capacity 3:3 Constitution 2:15 24:8 defend 2:15
appreciate 10:10 capital 4:19,20 12:13 continue 3:18 8:7 23:2 defendants 3:6
approach 7:22 careful 3:14 contributed 18:16 Department 7:5
appropriate 13:4 case 7:9 9:5 12:13,22 contribution 12:15 describe 5:21 6:3,11
approximately 7:9 15:5,18 17:18,21,22 control 15:10 describes 12:13
ARAMIS 1:6 18:3 19:15,21 20:1,3 controversial 7:17,18 deserve 19:14,15
arbitrarily 16:2 23:4 correct 21:13 23:20 Despite 5:4
area 4:14 case-by-case 16:19 Corrections 7:6 details 10:9
arrive 16:1 cases 2:5 3:16 4:22 cost 7:4 14:14 determination 9:19
arrived 4:4 11:8 23:2 7:14,15,20,20 9:3,4,6 costs 7:3,6,9 13:1
asked 12:10 19:12 9:10,14,18 13:2,3 Council 4:17 determined 3:11
asking 10:20 16:4,11,11,15 17:7,11 court 1:7 6:17 9:20,20 deterrance 5:19 6:11
assigned 17:13 17:13 19:14 23:18 13:19 16:18,20 17:1 21:17
assistant 12:18 22:22 cause 3:22 courts 6:22 deterrent 5:19 6:1
Association 2:16 7:8 caused 14:18 created 11:21 23:11
assure 8:6 13:16 certain 10:13 23:8 credible 5:5 14:18 difficult 4:4
attempt 9:12 certainty 5:20 8:10 Crime 6:7 directly 18:21 20:8
attorney 1:6 2:14 3:4 change 14:10,20 19:13 criminal 2:20 19:3 disagree 15:22
8:12,19 12:3,19,19 20:20 20:14 discretion 3:10 8:21,22
19:11 23:1 changed 12:14,18 currently 3:10 discuss 10:8

26
discussed 24:11 family 6:21 15:4,9,13 house 7:7 23:22 L
doing 3:12 15:17,18 humane 20:14 23:5 law 5:2,6,10,13,16 8:18
dollars 7:3 18:16 far 7:3 humanity 19:4 8:20 10:4,7,10,11,16
doubt 22:5 fate 17:17 husband 15:7 14:19 16:21 20:2
drag 14:12 20:22 FBI 6:7 21:20,21 22:3
drain 8:7 feel 14:16 19:16 I
learned 6:15
dropped 9:4,15 feeling 19:21 identified 21:15 led 7:18
duties 2:17 feelings 11:22 12:1,4 identify 21:14 left 6:18
duty 2:17 8:12 fewer 5:13 impacted 15:9 legal 2:12 3:22 8:16,18
file 17:9 18:1 impeachment 24:2 19:22
E filed 17:8 implement 7:12,22 legitimate 22:15
earlier 19:13 finally 7:2 implementation 8:11 level 12:20 23:2,3
effect 4:21 find 5:5,8 important 3:2 life 7:4,10 8:5 18:14
effective 4:19 6:2 first 12:13 importantly 4:7 19:5 listed 13:7
effectiveness 2:22 five 7:2 17:7 21:9,12 impose 7:12 LLP 1:1
efforts 5:4 Florida 1:6 5:17 6:8 7:5 improve 2:19 logical 21:16
egregiousness 13:5 7:7,9,11 8:20 17:16 impulsive 4:3 longer 12:18 23:18
elected 8:12 Florida's 2:6,9,13 3:21 including 5:17 6:8 look 6:20
eliminate 12:3 14:14 flux 11:20 inconsistent 13:21 looked 11:11
emotion 20:4 follow 7:21 16:20,22 increase 5:2 Loyd 9:5 17:18 18:3
emotional 4:3 10:14 20:16 increases 4:21 5:6 19:20
emotionally 16:2 followed 13:19 23:12 Loyd's 17:22 20:1
enacted 2:8 14:5,7 following 4:9 24:8 index 2:22
ended 5:12,14 force 18:2 individual 7:20 9:17 M
enforce 11:10 16:21 forthcoming 11:18 12:21 13:2 M 1:1
22:2 forward 2:5 11:11 14:3 individuals 9:13 main 21:8
enforced 19:18 found 4:9 5:9,12 influenced 18:18 maintain 10:4
enforcement 5:2,6,11 four 6:12 information 18:9 major 12:8
5:13,16 10:5,7,10,11 frequency 5:21 informative 4:20 making 2:21
10:16 14:19 21:21 further 10:8 inhumane 18:14 manage 7:20
engage 20:14 inmate 6:5 7:7 mandate 16:18
ensures 8:3 G integrity 8:4 19:3 mandates 16:14
entire 21:3 generally 5:19 intent 15:11 17:10 March 1:11
ethically 20:16 George 18:15 interest 3:12,13 8:13,14 Markeith 9:5 17:22 18:3
evidence 4:12 5:5 7:18 getting 15:16 16:12 interpretation 20:6 19:20 20:1
7:21 10:9 12:4 14:18 given 3:7 22:19 INTERVIEW 1:4 Master 15:3,16
evidence- 11:7 gives 6:13 8:20 investigation 18:5 matter 24:14
evidence-based 4:7 governor 13:22 issue 3:7 7:17 11:16 mean 13:8 16:3 22:22
7:22 10:15 19:6 GRANNIS 1:1 19:18 21:5,8 23:15
exception 19:7 grave 3:4 issued 13:20 members 15:18
execution 6:6,18,19 7:1 grueling 14:13 issues 13:20 23:1 million 7:10,12 12:15
executions 6:9 18:16 20:9
experts 8:16 19:22 H J
millions 7:3
extensive 3:7 half 18:16 January 13:17 Mina 10:8
handed 6:22 Jeff 12:9 mind 14:10,21 20:20
F handful 7:14 job 10:11 misled 22:5
face 6:21 handled 3:16 Judicial 1:7 month 13:10
facing 18:10 handling 2:4 jurisdiction 17:4,7,16 morning 2:3,9
fact 12:13 happens 6:2 jurors 17:16 move 14:3
factors 19:22 harm 3:18 14:18 justice 2:18,20 3:13 moved 11:11
facts 4:9 9:18 HARRIS 1:1 7:15 8:3,15 11:9 13:1 murder 6:10
fair 3:20 hearings 6:17 19:3 20:15 22:4 23:6
fairness 2:18 8:4 hesitate 17:2 justly 16:22 19:17 N
faith 6:20 highest 6:10 N.W 1:1
fall 12:8 hold 3:18 K
national 4:16,17 5:8
false 6:12 homicide 4:19,22,22 kill 9:13 nature 16:10
families 3:5,6 6:13,16 5:11,13 knew 22:18 necessary 23:10
8:9 17:14 21:3,18 hours 23:22 known 22:13 23:13 need 10:11

27
needs 23:9 6:15 7:3,13 8:22 9:3,6 11:4 12:4 23:4,6 result 7:1 10:21
negotiate 18:8,13,14 10:21 11:5,17,20 12:2 23:9 review 3:14 4:8,14,17
negotiation 18:12 12:11,12 13:4,12,19 pursued 22:16 10:21,22
Neither 5:21 6:3 13:21 14:22 15:5,18 pursuing 7:14 8:21 reviewed 2:11
never 6:20 8:6,7 17:1 16:4 17:7,10 18:10,18 12:12 23:18 revisit 21:5
new 2:8 3:15 19:10,15 20:2,3,19,21 row 6:5
newly 2:11 21:2,4,9 22:14,16 Q ruled 2:7
night 9:3 pending 16:4 17:6 qualm 12:12 rules 2:16 16:20 20:17
Ninth 1:7 people 3:18 9:10 11:16 question 22:1 24:9
noted 7:11 12:1 questions 4:4 23:21 ruling 13:18
Notice 17:9 percent 6:9 quote 4:18 run 22:11
number 4:11 5:1,18 personal 11:22 12:1,3 quoted 13:10 running 22:17,20
6:12 7:2 21:14
personally 21:10 R S
O phonetic 12:9 18:15 rarely 5:22 safe 10:12
oath 2:14 place 14:1 rate 6:10 safety 4:12 5:2,6 10:16
objectivity 2:18 plan 10:3 17:9 18:1 rates 4:22 21:19 23:12
obligation 20:12 played 13:12 re- 16:14 saying 13:11,13
Obviously 17:21 point 11:4 12:11 reached 15:6 says 12:9
occur 6:20 22:6 police 18:8 realistic 4:2 Sciences 4:17
offenders 8:6 policies 8:1 11:11 reasons 21:10,14 second 2:9 21:8
offense 13:5 policy 8:11 11:7 12:21 received 16:17 seek 2:17,19 3:1 4:10
offer 8:9 19:6 recommend 11:1 8:5 9:17 11:9 15:4
office 2:4 3:17 7:20 9:4 position 8:17 11:17,21 record 24:15 17:10
11:6,9 13:17,22 22:12 12:2,8,10 14:6 18:22 reflection 21:17 seeking 3:16 10:13
22:17,20 23:18 possibility 14:11 18:9 reform 2:19 19:3 20:15 15:17
officer 21:21 practical 4:6 regarding 13:19 20:13 sense 4:6
officers 5:2,7,16 10:17 pragmatic 4:2 regards 15:17 sensible 3:20
14:20 18:2 premature 14:6 relating 2:13 sentence 6:22 7:9,10
ones 13:3 presence 5:9 relationship 10:4 22:15
OPD 18:2 previous 17:8 released 8:7 sentences 2:21 3:11
opinion 21:18,19,20,22 previously 13:7 relevant 2:12 4:13 7:4 8:5 10:13
opportunities 19:10 prior 22:11,20 23:14 Report 6:7 sentencing 6:6 16:15
opportunity 9:17 15:8 priority 5:3 10:12 reported 7:8 Sergeant 15:3,16
oppose 6:14 prison 7:4 reporter 8:16 9:2,14 serious 3:4
option 17:17 19:11 prisons 7:7 10:1,19 11:13 12:7 serve 14:20
order 23:7 probably 22:12 13:8,10 14:9,22 15:3 setting 9:20
orders 13:20 16:22 process 3:9 14:12,13 15:15 16:3,6,10,16 severity 2:21 5:20
original 24:7 21:3 17:3,6,15,21 18:6,15 shows 6:8
outline 2:16 24:9 produced 1:21 19:7,20 20:8,11,18 signed 13:22
outlined 15:21,22 21:9 Professional 2:16 21:7 22:7,10,11,18 simply 4:3
21:12 professionalism 23:3 23:13,17,22 Simultaneous 9:8,22
outweigh 7:4 prohibited 2:21 Representatives 24:1 10:18 14:8 15:2,14
overriding 21:11 promise 6:21 require 7:19 16:5 17:5,20 19:19
owe 19:1 promises 6:12 19:3 required 12:21 20:7 21:6 22:9
20:13 requirement 22:3 single 15:12
P proper 11:9 requires 12:20 six 17:8
P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S properly 14:16 research 4:14,18 21:16 Soros 18:15,21
2:1 prosecuted 9:7 22:19 sorry 4:22 16:7
painstaking 3:8 prosecutor 2:17 24:10 resources 8:8 9:11,12 sound 13:15 20:16
PARTICIPANT 23:21 prosecutors 18:12 9:21 sounds 11:13 13:13
24:12 protect 2:14 4:13 respect 15:12 south 6:8
particular 11:10 provided 1:22 2:2 respond 9:11 speak 10:7 15:8,12,19
passed 2:12 public 4:12,13 21:19,20 response 15:15 16:16 18:21
penalty 2:5,7,10,13 3:2 23:12 responsibilities 20:17 speaking 9:8,22 10:18
3:16,21 4:1,8,10,11 punishment 4:19,21 24:9 14:8 15:2,14 16:5
4:15 5:1,6,9,10,12,14 6:1 responsibility 12:22 17:5,20 19:19 20:7
5:17,18,21,22 6:3,13 pursue 3:11 7:13 8:3 16:21,22 18:13 21:6 22:9

28
specifically 12:10 true 6:1 21:1,1
speed 14:12 trying 18:7,8 yesterday 15:7
spend 7:14 Tuesday 2:9
spends 7:11 turmoil 4:1 Z
spoken 8:17 10:2 17:12 twice 2:7
staff 9:9 10:20 two 2:10 5:1 9:4,14 0
staffed 9:10 13:18 23:21,22
stance 12:16 18:17 1
started 11:4 U 1.4 12:15 20:9
state 1:6 2:13 3:3 5:22 unable 5:4 12 6:5
6:4 8:8,12,18,19 12:2 uncertainly 6:17 15 1:11
12:18,19 17:16 19:11 uncertainty 3:22 19,577 7:6
22:22 24:2 unconstitutional 2:8 1919 1:1
statement 13:7 24:7 undergird 4:9 24:10
states 5:12,14,15,16 undergo 10:20 2
statute 2:7,8,10,12 3:15 understand 7:16 10:6 2.5 7:10
8:21 14:1,5,7 19:17 16:1 20036 1:2
21:9,11 22:2 understood 15:20 2015 12:9
steadfast 8:10 Unfortunately 15:7 2017 1:11
Street 1:1 Uniform 6:7
study 4:8 5:9,11,15 upset 10:7 3
21:16 upward 7:11 30 6:7
success 23:3 utilizing 9:20 34 4:15
suggested 24:4,6 3rd 13:17
suggests 5:5 V
support 2:14 6:14 versus 9:12,19 4
supported 19:16 victim 17:13
supporting 10:16 victim's 6:21 15:8 5
supports 12:5 victims 6:13,16 8:9 51 7:11
Supreme 13:19 16:18 14:13 15:12 22:4 53.49 7:6
16:20 17:1 victims' 3:5 21:2,18
surely 6:14 violent 8:6 6
suspect 18:8 voters 22:12 23:15
swiftly 6:3 7
system 11:2 13:21 W
20:22 waiting 6:18,18,19 9:19 8
9:19,20 80 6:9
T waits 6:5
table 18:7 wanted 13:11 9
talked 19:12 Washington 1:2 9 1:9,22
talking 16:14 wasting 9:21
tell 12:17 18:22 20:10 way 3:20 8:3 11:5 18:19
24:6 19:16 22:4
tended 5:12 Wednesday 1:11
Thank 24:13 weeks 10:19
theoretical 4:3 went 24:15
things 13:6 14:15 15:21 WFTV 1:9,22
19:1,4,12 21:12 24:11 WILTSHIRE 1:1
thoroughly 2:11 Withdraw 17:10
thought 3:8 22:19,22 wonderful 14:19
thoughts 24:3 wondering 11:15 24:2
three 5:18 10:19 working 10:4
tied 20:8
today 13:13 X
told 12:11 19:2 20:11
transcript 1:21 Y
traps 6:16 year 2:6 7:7,12 11:16
trial 17:11 years 2:10 4:15 6:5,7

29
C E R T I F I C A T E
MATTER: Interview of Aramis Ayala
DATE: 03-15-17
*IFSFCZDFSUJGZUIBUUIFBUUBDIFEUSBOTDSJQUJPOPG
QBHF 1 to 29 inclusive are to the best of my
QSPGFTTJPOBM ability a true, accurate, and complete
record of the above referenced proceedings as

contained on the provided audio recordingGVSUIFS
UIBU*BNOFJUIFSDPVOTFMGPS OPSSFMBUFEUP OPS
FNQMPZFECZBOZPGUIFQBSUJFTUPUIJTBDUJPOJO
XIJDIUIJTQSPDFFEJOHIBTUBLFOQMBDFBOEGVSUIFS
UIBU*BNOPUGJOBODJBMMZOPSPUIFSXJTFJOUFSFTUFE
JOUIFPVUDPNFPGUIFBDUJPO.
-----------------------
NEAL R. GROSS
COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS
1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com

Interview of Aramis Ayala

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Interview of Aramis Ayala

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Case 6:17-cv-00649-CEM-TBS Document 1-3 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 30 PageID 29

HARRIS, WILTSHIRE & GRANNIS, LLP

This transcript was produced from

audio provided by WFTV Channel 9.

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc.

2 (Time not provided.)

3 MS. AYALA: Good morning. I would

4 like to address how my office will be handling

5 death penalty cases going forward.

6 In just over a year Florida's death

7 penalty statute was twice been ruled

8 unconstitutional. A new statute was enacted this

9 past Tuesday morning. That is Florida's second

10 death penalty statute in less than two years.

11 I've thoroughly reviewed the newly

12 passed statute and relevant legal decisions

13 relating to Florida's death penalty. As a state

14 attorney I took an oath to support, protect and

15 defend the Constitution and the American Bar

16 Association Rules of Professional Conduct outline

17 my duties as a prosecutor. My duty is to seek

18 justice, which is fairness, objectivity and

19 decency. I am to seek reform and improve the

20 administration of criminal justice. I am

21 prohibited from making the severity of sentences

22 the index of my effectiveness.

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc.

1 Deciding when and if to seek death

2 penalty is one of the most important decisions I

3 will have to make in my capacity as state

4 attorney. It is a serious decision with grave

5 consequences for victims' families, for this

6 community and for defendants and their families.

7 I have given this issue extensive and

8 painstaking thought and consideration. What has

9 become abundantly clear through this process is

10 that while I currently do have discretion to

11 pursue death sentences, I have determined that

12 doing so is not in the best interest of this

13 community or the best interest of justice.

14 After careful review and consideration

15 of the new statute under my administration I will

16 not be seeking death penalty in the cases handled

17 in my office. Let me very clear, however, I will

18 continue to hold people who do harm to this

19 community accountable for their actions. I will

20 do so in a way that is sensible, fair and just.

21 Florida's death penalty has been the

22 cause of considerable legal chaos, uncertainty

Neal R. Gross and Co., Inc.

1 and turmoil. And analysis of death penalty must

2 be pragmatic. It must be realistic and not

3 simply theoretical, impulsive or emotional. I

4 had to answer difficult questions as I arrived at

6 Is it practical? Does it make sense?

7 And most importantly, is it evidence-based?

8 After review and study of death penalty, I have

9 found the following facts that undergird my

10 decision not to seek death penalty:

11 Number one, death penalty has no

12 public safety benefit. There is no evidence that

13 death sentences actually protect the public. A

14 comprehensive review of research in the area of

15 death penalty over 34 years was conducted by a