Officials at odds over why Houser bond reduced

By John W. Goodwin Jr.

The city prosecutor said his office saw the need for a high bond for Jamar Houser.

YOUNGSTOWN — The murder of an elderly woman has many questioning why the accused was free on a court-ordered bond.

Officials have different views on how Jamar Houser’s bond should have been handled last fall.

In October, a Mahoning County grand jury indicted Jamar Houser — now back in jail accused in the Jan. 23 killing of 80-year-old Angeline Fimognari — on felony charges of firing a gun into a home, aggravated menacing and assault. He was ordered to the county jail on $500,000 bond.

On Nov. 10, Houser asked Judge Lou D’Apolito of common pleas court to reduce the $500,000 bond. The judge reduced the bond to $20,000 and also allowed Houser to leave jail after posting 10 percent or $2,000.

The judge has said he cannot comment on the case because it is still pending, but many are wondering why someone accused of such a violent crime involving firearms was set free. Authorities believe Houser gunned down Fimognari after she left morning services at St. Dominic Church, 77 E. Lucius Ave.

County Prosecutor Paul Gains said one need only look to Ohio law and Houser’s case notes for answers concerning the bond reduction granted in November.

First, Gains points to Criminal Rule 46 in Ohio law, which spells out the types of bail available to defendants and conditions that can be placed on a defendant while free on bail.

“The issue is that you have constitutional guarantees of a reasonable bond,” he said. “The problem is you can’t predict a person’s behavior once they are out.”

City Prosecutor Jay Macejko agrees that officials cannot see into the future and determine who will commit crimes while on bond, but he said a good means of determining future behavior is looking at a person’s record.

He said his office analyzes the past records of defendants before requesting a bond amount — a practice he says should be adopted at the county level.

In the case involving Houser, Gains explains the charge of shooting into a house stems from a feud between Houser and two other men. He said the men who had been involved in shooting at people associated with Houser also were arrested.

Gains said one of the other men received a $15,000 bond for a felonious-assault charge while his co-defendant was given a $100,000 bond for two felonious assaults, shooting into a house and carrying a concealed weapon.

Houser was given the $500,000 bond for shooting into a house, the misdemeanor assault and the aggravated menacing.

“These bonds were all over the place,” Gains said. “It’s absolutely confusing.”

Gains added that municipal court judges often set high bonds for defendants, but there is nothing in the file to support the higher amount when the defendant comes to common pleas court and asks for a bond reduction.

In the Houser case last fall, the judge looked at three bond amounts for a related case to determine what was reasonable.

The defendant with a $100,000 bond asked for a reduction and saw his bond reduced to $15,000. Houser’s bond was reduced to $20,000. Gains said Houser’s bond likely was placed at a higher amount because of his past criminal history.

Macejko said determining what is reasonable by other bond amounts related to the case is not fair. He said bond is assessed on a case-by-case basis.

“Bond is designed to be tailored to the individual. It is extremely likely to see two people come over with bond amounts that are different,” said Macejko, a former assistant county prosecutor.

Gains said the best way to make sure a bond stays high once a defendant is bound over to common pleas court is a simple request from police or prosecutors at the city level.

He said a note placed in the file justifying the bond amount would have prompted his office to oppose any bond reduction in the Houser case and any similar case as well.

“We have to deal with the facts, not emotion, but facts,” Gains said. “We have a duty to not only prosecute these people but to do it fairly and constitutionally as do the trial judges. A note in the file would have been extremely helpful because we have to deal with facts.”

Macejko, however, said he has never seen a situation where a note about bond was included in the case file of a person bound over to common pleas court.

He said county prosecutors should do the legwork involved in checking a person’s criminal record when a bond-reduction request is made.

“Why do they need us when we saw it so plainly?” he said. “Why do they need us to help them do their job?”

Macejko said county prosecutors are invited to meet with him about any case, adding he was in favor of additional lines of communication.

jgoodwin@vindy.com