SHALIMAR - With Jeffrey Hutchinson's sentencing hearing looming next week, a prosecutor argued passionately for the death penalty Thursday, calling his crimes more atrocious than another well-known case involving the murder of children.

Assistant State Attorney Bobby Elmore argued that the Sept. 11, 1998 murders of Renee Flaherty, 32, and her children, Geoffrey, 9, Amanda, 7, and Logan, 4, met a state standard for the death penalty, as "heinous, atrocious and cruel."

The prosecutor said the manner of the murders, in which a pistol-grip shotgun was used, and the children's horror as they realized what was happening to them, supported that standard and should be considered by Okaloosa Circuit G. Robert Barron as he considers sentencing Hutchinson Tuesday to either life in prison without parole or death.

The "heinous, atrocious and cruel" standard was met in death-row inmate Edward Zakrzewski's case by the "most intense horror, terror and mind-numbing emotional strain that anyone can imagine" as his children, Edward, 7, and Anna, 5, realized they were being murdered by their machete-wielding father.

Even that, Elmore argued in recounting Geoffrey Flaherty's murder, was "less disturbing than seeing his mother's face blown off or seeing his sister's head blown off," and "a huge gaping hole in the face of his younger brother."

But Barron should disregard the "heinous, atrocious or cruel" argument, defense lawyer Stephen Cobb said in his written legal arguments, contending that that standard rarely involves firearm murders.

He cited a Florida Supreme Court case in which the standard was found not to apply because the murder took place "over the course of minutes and that the defendant did not intend to inflict prolonged or torturous suffering."

Those were among reasons given by Elmore and Cobb for Barron to consider in his life-or-death decision for Hutchinson as Tuesday's sentencing date approaches.

Also Thursday, Hutchinson was on the brink of making a public statement about his case in court, but backed off, explaining that he did not want to "insult" the court.

While he did not elaborate, Hutchinson said in his own handwritten motion in December that he wanted Barron replaced by another judge. His motion, which the judge denied as legally insufficient, claimed that Barron was biased against him.

Barron will have the last word on Hutchinson's fate next week, following the defendant's Jan. 18 conviction.

After the conviction, as the trial entered the penalty phase, defense lawyers Stephen and Kimberly Cobb asked that the jury be dismissed. Barron granted that request, meaning the jury did not have to make the life-or-death sentencing recommendation normally rendered in cases in which the death penalty could apply. Much of Elmore's argument Thursday centered on comparisons to the Zakrzewski

case.

Until the murders for which Hutchinson was convicted, that case, for which Edward Zakrzewski is on death row, involved the largest number of multiple victims in Okaloosa County. That resulted from the 1994 murders of his wife, Sylvia, and their children in their Mary Esther home.

Barron is well familiar with the Zakrzewski case. He was the trial judge in that case, and sentenced Zakrzewski, then a tech sergeant stationed at Eglin Air Force Base, to death.

Murders committed in the course of another felony, which Elmore identified in Hutchinson's case as aggravated child abuse, are among reasons legally justifying a death sentence, he argued.

Another reason, Elmore argued, was the horror inflicted on the children in the Hutchinson case, triggering the "heinous, atrocious and cruel" standard that can justify a death sentence in Florida.

He especially concentrated on the murder of 9-year-old Geoffrey Flaherty.

"After having his chest blown to pieces, he tried to get away," Elmore said, of the boy's last few seconds of life. "On his knees, he saw what was coming next, the fatal head shot. His horror cannot be described in words."

"I've never felt so strongly that heinous, atrocious and cruel applies," Elmore said.

But defense lawyer Stephen Cobb said Barron should not consider that standard as he weighs Hutchinson's fate.

It should be disregarded, he argued, because that standard applies only in murders involving torture of the victims. Citing trial testimony from Associate Medical Examiner Dr. Michael Berkland, Cobb said the slayings occurred within 10 seconds, suggesting that was not enough time for the victims to fully appreciate what was happening to them.

As for Elmore's description of Geoffrey Flaherty's horror in seeing his family murdered and realizing he was also about to be killed, Cobb argued, "There's a difference between proving something and inferring it."

Elmore also said the victims were "particularly vulnerable" because of Hutchinson's family-like relationship with them, and his "custodial authority" with the children. He knew there was no one else in the house to defend the victims, and that they were unarmed, Elmore said.

Cobb said that did not apply because Renee Flaherty by that time considered their relationship ended, citing her conversation in a phone call to a friend in Seattle about an hour before the murders.

The lawyers also clashed over Hutchinson's mental health, and whether due to a high blood-alcohol level, he was under severe emotional or mental stress the night of the murders.

Although a psychiatrist testified that Hutchinson suffers from a severe mental condition known as bipolar disorder, Elmore said two experienced psychologists disagreed with that diagnosis. The psychiatrist was testifying in his first case involving murder, he said.

Cobb, however, said the psychiatrist was the only expert with a medical degree testifying in the case.

Hutchinson's argument with Renee Flaherty shortly before the murders, his intoxication and mental disorder all left him unable to appreciate the criminality of his conduct and with an inability to conform his conduct to the requirements of the law, Cobb argued.

Those also left Hutchinson under emotional and mental stress, he said, listing more reasons for the judge to impose a sentence of life without parole instead of a death sentence.

Barron has set sentencing for 9 a.m. on Tuesday in courtroom D at the Shalimar courthouse annex.