Wednesday, July 22, 2009
A lying murderer conned the Ohio Parole Authority; Strickland must see the truth
One of the most difficult tasks that falls to a governor is denying clemency to a prisoner facing execution, but there are times that a governor is obligated to do so in the name of justice.
And so it is that Gov. Ted Strickland should reject a clemency recommendation by the Ohio Adult Parole Authority and affirm the 1996 death sentence for Jason Getsy, 33, who set out on a mission to murder Charles Serafino on July 7, 1995. After invading Serafino’s Hubbard Township home, he shot Serafino, left him for dead, and then murdered Serafino’s 66-year-old mother in cold blood. He was not only prepared to kill Serafino, he was determined to leave no witnesses, even if that meant shooting Mrs. Serafino twice from close range as she lay on the floor of her bedroom. The judge who sentenced Getsy noted that he punctuated his murderous act with an exclamation, “Die, bitch,” which speaks to the level of Getsy’s indifference toward the loss of anyone’s life but his own.
Getsy and his legal advocates, family and friends, wove together a tale that combined convoluted legal arguments, alleged redemption during 14 years awaiting (and fighting) his execution and outright lies about what happened. They managed to convince five of seven parole board members to recommend clemency to the governor. Two members issued strong and legally sound dissents.
Misplaced emphasis
The majority report to the governor placed an undue weight on the fact that Getsy was the only one of four conspirators in the crime to receive the death penalty. Evidence showed that Getsy was the only one who shot Serafino or his mother. He was also the only one who had killed before. At the age of 17, he shot a 15-year-old friend in the face during what he had described as a game of Russian roulette. Rather than recognize the gravity of what he had done, Getsy continued to pursue his fascination with firearms. He was the only one who carried his own gun the night he and two accomplices approached the Serafino house. One of the three feigned a sprained ankle and turned back, the other fired a blast from a borrowed shotgun that shattered a patio door. The mastermind of the plan, John Santine, who wanted Serafino killed because of a business dispute, stayed home. Getsy, who once saw a friend die at the end of his gun barrel, chose to kill again.
Getsy was portrayed during his July 9 clemency hearing as a model prisoner who had found religion during the long years of appeals. But Getsy, quite frankly, cannot be believed.
His description of the shooting of Mrs. Serafino as an accident when she stepped into his line of fire is clearly disputed by the evidence. Even the clemency board obviously knew Getsy lied, but couldn’t bring itself to say so. “His account of the details was not entirely consistent with the version that was given to authorities” was how the board described his dissemblance.
In trying to convince the board that he was a dupe of Santine, whom he said he feared, Getsy testified that he “pretended to be excited” when talking to Santine about having just killed two people (not knowing that he had only wounded his primary target). Did it occur to the board that someone who could claim to have pretended to be excited about killing someone, could just as well pretend to be a changed, remorseful, potentially useful member of society? Apparently not.
But more troublesome than the board’s willingness to see Getsy as someone worthy of mercy is its muddling of the law.
Not everyone involved in a conspiracy is going to receive the same verdict or the same punishment. To suggest that the triggerman’s punishment must be reduced to some lower common denominator in the name of justice is a disservice to anything approaching justice. The parole board’s recommendation in the Getsy case has spurred a number of prosecuting attorneys from around the state to join Trumbull County Prosecutor Dennis Watkins in writing letters to Strickland urging him not to endorse the parole authority’s rewriting of the legal concept of proportionality. The law requires that the punishment be proportionate to the crime, not that the punishment of one conspirator be equal to that of other conspirators. Should Santine have also received the death penalty? Quite possibly, but he was tried by a different jury in a different county and he was not found guilty of murder for hire, which could have carried the death penalty.
The jury spoke
A Trumbull County jury heard the evidence against Getsy and found him guilty of aggravated murder with three specifications. They heard from defense witnesses who tried to convince them that Getsy should be spared because of mitigating circumstances in his upbringing. They heard Getsy’s unsworn version of what happened and his plea for mercy. They heard all the evidence, they witnessed Getsy’s demeanor during the trial and they recommended the death sentence, which was affirmed by the judge.
Thirteen years later, five of the seven members of the parole board are willing to disregard the collective wisdom of judge and jury, but Gov. Strickland should not make the same mistake.
The judge and jury got it right. Getsy is a cold- blooded murderer and in the name of justice for Mrs. Serafino and her family, he should be executed on schedule, Aug. 18. Strickland should reject the board’s recommendation and send a message that justice, though not always swift, is sure. And he should let the parole board know that it overreached in this case and placed its own credibility in jeopardy.