|
The Lima News
State Prosecutors Defend Themselves Against Misstatements In Spirko Case
By GREG SOWINSKI COLUMBUS — After being accused of misrepresenting evidence at an earlier clemency hearing for John Spirko, state prosecutors on Wednesday systematically challenged each allegation waged against them. The prosecution is trying to keep Spirko’s execution, scheduled for Nov. 15, intact after it was delayed to allow a second clemency hearing by the Ohio Parole Board. Spirko was convicted in the 1982 abduction and killing of Elgin Postmaster Betty Jane Mottinger. Using video recordings from the last hearing in August and from Spirko’s 1984 trial, prosecutors challenged allegations made by the Cleveland Plain Dealer that they misrepresented evidence. State prosecutors also used newspaper clippings to show that Spirko made statements about the killing that never made it into the newspapers following the abduction and murder. The statements included a description of the clothing Mottinger was wearing when abducted, how many times she was stabbed and the curtain wrapped around her body. Wednesday’s hearing came about after the Plain Dealer accused Senior Deputy Attorney General Tim Prichard of making false statements and mischaracterize evidence at the previous hearing regarding what Spirko knew about the murder and his whereabouts the day of the killing. Spirko was convicted in the abduction and murder of Mottinger who vanished from the Elgin post office Aug. 9, 1982. Her body was found six weeks later in a soybean field in Findlay, some 60 miles away. The parole board will issue its report with a recommendation on clemency to Gov. Bob Taft on Wednesday. The governor will issue a decision before Spirko’s scheduled execution. Spirko’s attorneys continued with their same defense saying there was too much doubt and too little evidence to go forward with Spirko’s execution. They said Spirko was innocent and asked for clemency. Spirko attorney Tom Hill said the case boils down to statements Spirko made and the credibility of U.S. Postal Service Investigator Paul Hartman. Hill also said there was no physical evidence to link Spirko to the murder. “This is a classic case of he said he said. This is Paul Hartman versus John Spirko. Both have no credibility. Both are liars trying to outsmart the other,” Hill said. Spirko’s team also challenged the state’s theory of the crime saying Hartman disagreed with it and believed Spirko’s former cellmate from a Kentucky prison was not involved in the crime. Spirko’s original defense was he learned details of the crime that were not made public from his cellmate, Delaney Gibson. Spirko’s team now maintains Gibson was out of state when the crime occurred. Spirko’s defense team also raised the issue of another postal inspector questioning Hartman’s credibility. That inspector worked under Hartman. State prosecutors took a sworn statement from the inspector in which he admitted to not being part of the Mottinger investi-gation or having any evidence to show Hartman did anything wrong. The defense team also suggested the jury might not reach the same verdict today given the allegations made since the trial. That was challenged by Parole Board member Peter Davis who disputed the statement. “I think what really hung Mr. Spirko is Mr. Spirko,” Davis said. “It was how he testified on his own behalf and he couldn’t explain away his own previous statements.” After prosecutors finished defending their statements from the previous hearing, Mottinger’s family picked up with criticizing the media and specifically took aim at the Cleveland Plain Dealer for its coverage. Jane Varley, whose brother is married to one of Mottinger’s daughters, said the Plain Dealer “would have you believe that Spirko is a misunderstood saint and the state of Ohio is a bold-faced lying devil.” Varley asked the board to execute Spirko. Tom Varley, who is Mottinger’s son in law, read a statement from Mottinger’s son, Kent Mottinger, which also blasted the media for their coverage and government officials for allowing killers to be set free and kill again. The letter alluded to Kentucky parole officials who freed Spirko from prison just weeks before Mottinger’s abduction. Spirko was serving time for a murder conviction in that state.
|