EDITORIAL:Petro wrong to push execution

Mr. Spirko was convicted by a jury and had the benefit of appeals through the state system. His conviction has been reviewed and upheld in the federal courts. The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review his case. He has been on death row for more than 20 years.

But that's not the complete story.

A Newsweek investigation into the death penalty in 2000 included the Spirko case as one of five cases nationally "where there may be big questions."

Meanwhile, a federal appellate judge wrote last year that "a striking fact about the record in this case is the complete absence of any forensic evidence linking Spirko to the crime. There are no fingerprints, footprints, fibers, blood or stolen items to bolster the state's case. Nor is there any written or recorded confession of guilt by Spirko or incriminating testimony by a witness who turned state's evidence."

The conviction, he wrote, is based on "three shaky pillars."

One of those pillars is the testimony by an eye witness who was "100 percent sure" that a man named Delaney Gibson - a close associate of Mr. Spirko and principal accomplice to the crime, according to the prosecution's theory - was at the post office when the victim was abducted.

That pillar has started to totter.

The lead state investigator of the murder, who's now retired, gave recorded statements earlier this year that he concluded, before trial, that Delaney Gibson had nothing to do with the murder, and said he discussed why with prosecutors. None of this information, though, was revealed to defense attorneys or the courts during the criminal case - and Delaney Gibson was never prosecuted.

This disclosure has led to serious charges by serious lawyers that their client's conviction and sentencing to death was obtained by prosecutorial misconduct.

Thomas Hill, a former federal prosecutor who practices with a law firm in Washington, is Mr. Spirko's lead attorney. He says he's "convinced that John Spirko did not abduct and murder Betty Jane Mottinger," and he's "equally convinced that had the state played fair at his trial ... John Spirko would not have been convicted, let alone sentenced to death."

The matter is now before U.S. District Judge James R. Carr in Toledo, who is deciding whether to take a second look at the case. He suggested in court on July 20 that the attorney general "join in a request directly to the Supreme Court of Ohio to lift its execution order, giving me the time I need before the scheduled date of execution ... to conclude the proceeding in front of me."

Attorney General Jim Petro's office wouldn't accommodate Judge Carr and ensure he has a full chance to weigh these serious claims. Mr. Petro is entitled to argue Mr. Spirko is guilty and was fairly convicted. But pushing for an execution by rushing proceedings that call into question prosecutorial integrity is wrong - potentially dead wrong.