|
Editorial's Errors On Spirko Need Corrected
Facts in death row inmate's case prove his guilt Re the Aug. 5 editorial ("Petro wrong to push execution") about death row inmate John Spirko: Contrary to that editorial, there has been no rush to judgment in this case. In all death penalty cases, I believe there should be "super" due process and am satisfied that Spirko's case has received sufficient judicial review to ensure that his conviction and sentence are fair. During the last 21 years, this case has been reviewed by the Ohio appellate courts, the U.S. District Court in Toledo and the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, and all made the same conclusion — that Spirko was justly convicted and sentenced. Despite Spirko's claims, the trial record reveals that his trial lawyers were fully aware of the Delaney Gibson facts. His trial attorneys were provided the names and addresses of witnesses who claimed Gibson was in North Carolina the day before Betty Jane Mottinger's brutal murder and also were told that these witnesses claimed to have pictures of Gibson taken that weekend. Spirko had three investigators who worked with his attorneys at trial. It is likely they did not present any additional information about Delaney Gibson at trial because Spirko himself testified under oath that Gibson was in Ohio and that Gibson, his former cellmate and convicted murderer, killed Mottinger. Was he lying then or is he lying now? The fact is Spirko never repudiated that testimony. But now, Spirko chooses to highlight the sole investigator who thinks Delaney Gibson may not have been involved, although he has no evidence to support this claim. This person was not the lead investigator, as Spirko claims. There was a task force assembled of more than 40 investigators. This investigator was one of those 40. In fact, he didn't even interview the witnesses who identified Spirko and Gibson at the crime scene. Most important, even though Spirko has raised nothing new in 21 years, my office agreed to allow Spirko's lawyers to conduct discovery and depose witnesses. For nearly eight weeks this year, from May 6 to June 30, I provided staff to conduct discovery and depose witnesses, traveling from Angola, Ind., to Tampa, Fla., deposing nine witnesses — all chosen by Spirko's attorneys. Suspiciously absent from Spirko's deposition request was Delaney Gibson. Despite a total of 47 hours of depositions and 1,697 pages of sworn testimony, the result was that not a single witness believed that Spirko was innocent. No additional evidence that would preclude Gibson's participation was uncovered. John Spirko is not innocent. His most recent pleading before U.S. District Judge James R. Carr is not a claim of innocence. Instead, Spirko is just now highlighting the opinion of this one investigator as warranting a stay of his execution. The majority of the judges in the federal court — just like every one of Spirko's new witnesses — are firmly convinced of his guilt. Spirko, in his continuing pattern of self-serving deception, has just told the Ohio Parole Board that he was also wrongly convicted for the July 3, 1969, murder of 73-year-old Myra Ashcroft of Kentucky — a crime to which he confessed and was convicted. The facts of this case are important and should be correctly reported and accurately reflected in any editorials and stories. Again, I strongly believe in "super" due process and that every avenue of appeal should appropriately be explored in capital cases. However, the Dayton Daily News editorial made factual errors that should be corrected. Jim Petro is Ohio attorney general. REPONSE TO JIM PETRO's EDITORIAL
|
