A judge denied a request Wednesday by the attorneys representing Matt Baker in his murder trial to let them withdraw from the case because “a serious and material breach of confidence has developed” between them and Baker.

Kerville attorneys Guy James Gray and Harold Danford did not give much detail about what prompted their request, which was heard during a pretrial hearing in Waco’s 19th State District Court. However, they did make a point of saying their request was not a delay tactic. Baker’s trial is set to begin Jan. 11.

The 38-year-old former minister is charged in the April 2006 death of his wife, Kari, the 31-year-old mother of his two daughters. Prosecutors say Baker slipped his wife sleeping pills and then smothered her with a pillow after she passed out on a combination of pills and alcohol.

“Movant represents to the Court that a serious and material breach of confidence has developed between Movant and defendant such that Movant cannot provide defendant with effective assistance of counsel,” Gray wrote in his request to withdraw from the case. “Movant has thus far acted as counsel for defendant, pro bono, based upon a common understanding of defensive strategy on represented facts.

“. . . The best interests of the public, this defendant, as well as this attorney, will be served by the appointment of a new lawyer to represent the defendant.”

In a sworn affidavit that accompanied Gray’s motion, he added that “the circumstances requiring this motion occurred only recently.”

Danford filed a similar motion.

When Gray presented the motion Wednesday, he told Judge Ralph Strother that Baker and his mother wanted the two attorneys to continue to represent him. Gray also said the attorneys would agree to stay on the case if the judge wanted them to.

Strother then asked Baker if he wanted the attorneys to remain on the case. When he said he did, Strother denied the request, leaving Gray and Danford as Baker’s attorneys.

The Tribune-Herald was not able to ask the attorneys any questions about why they filed the motions because of a gag order Strother has imposed on parties on both sides involved with the trial.

Legal experts said that without more information, any guesses about why Baker’s attorney filed the request to withdraw would be speculation. But there are a number of reasons an attorney could file such a motion, they said.

For example, an attorney could belatedly discover a conflict of interest that would give him concerns about continuing to represent a client, said Josh Davis, a professor at the University of San Francisco School of Law and the director of its Center for Law and Ethics. If disclosing the nature of that conflict would potentially harm the client, the attorney would only be able to offer a vague reason for wanting to withdraw, he said.

Another possible trigger for such a motion might be a client refusing to follow what the attorney feels are critical instructions, said David Hricik, a professor at Mercer University School of Law in Georgia.

Such a motion could also be an indication that an attorney thinks his client is going to perjure himself or otherwise wants to present false evidence at trial, both Davis and Hricik said. Although attorneys cannot disclose anything that might harm their client, they are not supposed to knowingly present false evidence, they said.

In cases where such a motion is prompted by a fear that a client will commit perjury, there is debate in the legal community about whether it is appropriate for a defense attorney to file it, Davis said. Some lawyers argue that they can never know for sure whether a client plans to lie and that such a motion amounts to a red flag that could harm the client. Others say such an attitude is a cop-out and that attorneys have a duty to act if they are being asked to present what they think to be false testimony, he said.

Other motions

During Wednesday’s hearing, Strother considered several other motions from both the defense and prosecutors. Most were routine. However, two dealt with issues concerning Baker’s alleged girlfriend, Vanessa Bulls.

In one motion, the defense asked the judge to order prosecutors to reveal the details of any agreements they entered into to obtain the testimonies of witnesses, especially Bulls. McLennan County prosecutor Crawford Long told Strother that the state had made an agreement with only one witness and would make information about it available to the defense before trial.

Strother denied another motion made by Baker’s attorneys asking the judge to force prosecutors to disclose Bulls’ testimony to the grand jury. Judge Matt Johnson of Waco’s 54th State District Court granted Bulls testimonial immunity before her March 25 grand jury appearance, which meant nothing she said during her testimony could be used against her. Baker’s lawyers have not been given access to a transcript of her grand jury testimony, after which Baker was indicted.

Gray said the defense needs to see the testimony because he has heard that what Bulls told the grand jury was substantially different than what she told Baker’s defense team and police who investigated Kari Baker’s death.

Those initial statements indicated she had not been romantically involved with Baker, he said, and did not implicate him in his wife’s death. If Bulls told the grand jury something different, the defense needs time to look into the discrepancies, he said.

Gray also said that DNA analysis performed on a suicide note purportedly written by Kari Baker, as well as a pill bottle found near her body, could not rule out that Bulls had touched those items.

“Pure D fairness” necessitates the defense being given access to the grand jury testimony before trial, Gray said.

Long countered by saying Texas law allows for grand jury testimony to be kept secret until after a witness testifies at trial.

Though Strother denied the defense’s motion, he said he would “keep an open mind” about the issue as the case proceeded.

Other motions argued Wednesday revealed that prosecutors plan to call two or three expert witnesses during the trial, which is expected to last two weeks. In all, prosecutors have subpoenaed 97 witnesses.

Gray said the defense does not yet have any expert witnesses it plans to call.

Seventy potential jurors are being summoned for the trial, a number that is slightly higher than normal. Attorneys in the case will begin reviewing information about potential jurors Jan. 11 and then start the selection process the next day.

Baker is free on bond and is living in Kerrville with his two daughters. He has claimed that his wife was despondent over the death of a daughter seven years before and took her own life with sleeping pills while their two daughters were asleep down the hall and he was out renting a movie and buying more premixed alcoholic drinks.

Witnesses have told authorities that Kari Baker suspected her husband was having an affair and was afraid he would try to kill her after she found a powdery substance in a bottle in his briefcase. Other witnesses have said they spotted Baker and Bulls looking at engagement rings at the mall in Waco just days after his wife’s death.

Baker also gave Bulls his dead wife’s cell phone, and they racked up hundreds of hours of calls on the phone not long after Kari Baker died.

Baker has denied that he and Bulls were having an affair. He also said he and Bulls were looking for earrings for his daughters at the store.

cculp@wacotrib.com

757-5744