Summary:

Vrabel bought a gun on March 3, 1989 and killed his 29-year-old live-in girlfriend, Susan Clemente. He then shot their hysterical 3-year-old daughter, Lisa.

After shooting the victims, Vrabel placed the bodies in the refrigerator at their apartment, and continued living there for more than a month before leaving the city.

When he learned several weeks later that the bodies had been discovered, Vrabel conferred with a priest, turned himself in to authorities and confessed to the murders.

Vrabel never said why he bought a gun or had killed Susan, but said he killed Lisa because she was hysterical, and he felt she would be better off dead with her mother dead and her father going to prison.

Vrabel was subsequently found to be incapable of assisting in his own defense as a result of mental illness, and therefore incompetent to stand trial.

In 1994, after five years of confinement in mental hospitals, Vrabel was found sufficiently recovered to go to trial and was re-indicted on the aggravated murder charges. He was convicted of both murders and the sentence was affirmed on appeal. Vrabel waived the remainder of his available federal appeals.

Citations:

State v. Vrabel, 790 N.E.2d 303 (Ohio 2003) (Direct Appeal).

Final Meal:

A BLT with extra mayonnaise, ham and cheese omelet with extra cheese, two hot dogs with mustard, pork and beans, potato salad, vanilla ice cream, chocolate pudding and six Cokes.

Final Words:

"I want to thank my sister for all the joy and happiness she brought into Lisa's life, and I want to apologize to anyone I may have wronged in my life."

ClarkProsecutor.org

Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction

Inmate #: 313033
Inmate: Stephen Allen Vrabel
Race: White
Gender: Male
DOB: 10/15/56
County of Conviction: Mahoning
Received at DOC: 10/20/95
Offenses: AGGRAVATED MURDER, AGGRAVATED MURDER

ProDeathPenalty.Com

Stephen Vrabel of Struthers, Ohio appeals his aggravated murder conviction and death sentence for the 1989 murders of his girlfriend, Susan Clemente, and their 3-year-old daughter, Lisa Clemente.

After shooting the victims, Vrabel placed the bodies in the refrigerator at their apartment, and continued living there for more than a month before leaving the city. When he learned several weeks later that the bodies had been discovered, Vrabel conferred with a priest, turned himself in to authorities and confessed to the murders.

He was subsequently found to be incapable of assisting in his own defense as a result of mental illness, and therefore incompetent to stand trial. In 1994, after five years of confinement in mental hospitals, Vrabel was found sufficiently recovered to go to trial and was re-indicted on the aggravated murder charges.

During pretrial proceedings, Vrabel filed written pleas of not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity and asserted his right to waive legal counsel and represent himself. The court appointed two attorneys to serve as advisory counsel, but Vrabel refused to provide them with any information or accept their assistance in preparing a defense.

In one of several pretrial competency hearings at which he represented himself, Vrabel did not dispute a court-appointed psychiatrist's testimony that he was competent to stand trial. Less than a month before his scheduled trial date, the court granted his motion to represent himself at trial and he withdrew his insanity plea. Five days before the scheduled trial date, Vrabel re-filed a plea of not guilty by reason of insanity and requested the assistance of counsel. The trial was postponed for six months to allow attorneys to prepare a defense. Once jurors had been selected, Vrabel again moved that his attorneys be dismissed and he be allowed to represent himself. This time the court denied his motions.

After the jury convicted Vrabel on both murder charges, the judge granted his request to limit mitigation testimony on his behalf during the sentencing phase of the trial to a brief personal statement by Vrabel to the jurors. In his statement, Vrabel told the jury there were no mitigating circumstances that should prevent them from imposing the death penalty. After less than a day's deliberation, the jury returned a death penalty recommendation. The 7th District Court of Appeals upheld both the murder convictions and death sentence.

In July 2003 he submitted a handwritten letter, asking to waive any further appeals, to Ohio Public Defender David Bodiker. Vrabel has undergone evaluations by two mental health experts, said Kim Norris, spokeswoman for Attorney General Jim Petro. "They both determined that he understands his consequences, and he doesn't have any mental illnesses," Norris said.

UPDATE:

In March 1989, Stephen Vrabel took a newly purchased handgun and after drinking beer and smoking marijuana shot his girlfriend in the head, then shot her again so she wouldn’t suffer. With their 3-year-old daughter “freaking out” at the sight, according to Vrabel’s account, he shot her in the head, figuring it was best because her mother was dead and he was going to jail. The next day, Vrabel stuffed his girlfriend’s body in the refrigerator and his daughter’s in the freezer, along with her favorite stuffed animals, a bear and bunny.

Sentenced to death for the crime, Vrabel dropped his appeals and asked to be put to death. The Ohio Supreme Court set a July 14 execution date. If executed, Vrabel, 47, would be the second Ohio death row inmate in five years to voluntarily abandon court appeals to speed his execution. Wilford Berry, dubbed “The Volunteer,” was the first, in February 1999. “Please do not do to me what you did to Wilford Berry,” Vrabel said in a letter to Ohio Public Defender David Bodiker last year. “I have to believe you should use your resources in helping those who wish to contest their decisions, rather than using your resources to contest my choice.”

In March, a Mahoning County judge agreed with experts hired by prosecutors and the state public defender’s office both said Vrabel was competent to drop his appeals. Vrabel “has a rational, logical understanding of the reasons for the death penalty, and the reasons for punishment, and of his legal situation,” John Fabian, a clinical psychologist hired by Bodiker’s office, wrote in a March report.

A report by a Case Western Reserve University psychiatrist for prosecutors reached the same conclusion, though said Vrabel’s “delusional disorder” was not in complete remission. Vrabel retains vague ideas that police conspired to change his confession and believes medical problems are a result of prison medical procedures rather than his bowel disease, according to the report by psychiatrist Phillip Resnick. Vrabel has the right to drop his appeals, Attorney General Jim Petro said. “The evidence in this case is one that is substantially overwhelming, so he’s kind of basically willing to throw in the towel,” Petro said Thursday. “That’s not a bad thing.”

Vrabel could still pursue federal appeals if he wished. Bodiker called the pending execution “a travesty,” pointing out that Vrabel spent 1990 to 1994 at a psychiatric center because he was ruled incompetent to stand trial. He was eventually ruled competent in February 1995. A divided Ohio Supreme Court upheld Vrabel’s death sentence by a 4-3 vote last year. Chief Justice Thomas Moyer argued that Vrabel didn’t fall into the category of killers the state’s death penalty was reserved for because of his mental health problems.

Vrabel lived in his apartment for several weeks after the murders with the bodies in the refrigerator and freezer, according to court documents. A message was left with Vrabel’s Youngstown attorneys. Vrabel has turned down interview requests. Susan Clemente, 29, was a nursing home aide and former high school runner whose hurdle record fell only last year, said Kenneth Kotouch, 49, the husband of Clemente’s sister, Lydia, and a former police detective who helped investigate the murders. Clemente’s father said the family is happy to see the case resolved, although he said his has mixed feelings about the death penalty. “Sometimes I think being in prison all your life is worse than going to the death chamber,” said Anthony Clemente, 73, of suburban Youngstown, a retired construction worker and teacher. “One way I think he deserves it, the other way I think if he stayed in prison the rest of his life it would be 10 times worse.”

Killer put to death

Cincinnati Post

July 15, 2004

LUCASVILLE -- A man who killed his girlfriend and their daughter, then hid their bodies in the family apartment's refrigerator and freezer for a month, kept silent about his motives to the end. Stephen Vrabel, 47, was pronounced dead at 10:14 a.m. Wednesday at the Southern Ohio Correction Facility in Lucasville. He had asked to be executed for his two murder convictions, and was the second death row inmate since 1999 to drop his appeals to speed the process.

Vrabel gave his brief final statement in a clear voice: "I want to thank my sister for all the joy and happiness she brought into Lisa's life, and I want to apologize to anyone I may have wronged in my life."

Although Vrabel confessed to shooting 29-year-old Susan Clemente and 3-year-old Lisa Clemente on March 3, 1989, in the Youngstown suburb of Struthers, he never gave a reason.

Vrabel was the 13th man executed since 1999, and was the fourth this year. Another inmate who dropped his appeals is scheduled to be executed Tuesday. Scott Mink, 40, pleaded guilty at trial to beating his parents to death with a ball-peen hammer while they slept.

Inmate executed after statement, smile for sister

Cleveland Plain Dealer

AP - July 15, 2004

Associated Press - Lucasville - A man executed Wednesday for killing his girlfriend and their daughter smiled at his sister while strapped to the gurney, after she blew him a kiss and whispered "I love you." Stephen Vrabel, 47, was pronounced dead eight minutes later, at 10:14 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. He was the second death row inmate since 1999 to drop his appeals to speed his execution.

Authorities said Vrabel shot Susan Clemente, 29, his girlfriend of about four years, and 3-year-old Lisa Clemente in their heads, on March 3, 1989, at their apartment in the Youngstown suburb of Struthers. He had bought the handgun that day.

"I want to thank my sister for all the joy and happiness she brought into Lisa's life, and I want to apologize to anyone I may have wronged in my life," Vrabel, speaking in a clear voice, said in his final statement. Vrabel's sister, Karen Koval, sobbed quietly throughout the execution and leaned on her son, Greg Koval. Susan Clemente's father, son, two brothers and two brothers-in-law also witnessed the execution. The men were silent and did not show any emotion.

After giving his statement, Vrabel began blinking rap idly, and after the drugs took effect, he breathed deeply three times, gasped twice, then took a series of shallow breaths. His Adam's apple bobbed up and down several times, and then he was still. The execution team had trouble inserting a shunt into Vrabel's right arm before the execution and finally got it in after several tries.

One of Clemente's brothers-in-law addressed reporters afterward, joined by 18 other family members and friends. "Susan and Lisa Clemente have finally been put to rest after 15 years of legal battles with the court system. They both can rest in peace now knowing that this nightmare has finally come to an end," Kenneth Kotouch said, standing near poster-size photographs.

Vrabel never said why he shot Susan Clemente. He said he shot their daughter whom he described Friday as a "perfect child" because she was "freaking out" about her mother's death and he thought killing her was best because her mother was dead and he was going to jail.

National Coalition to Abolish the Death Penalty

Stephen Vrabel, OH - July 14, 10 AM EST

The state of Ohio is scheduled to execute Stephen Vrabel, a white man, July 14 for the 1989 murders of his common-law wife, Susan Clemente, and daughter Lisa. Mr. Vrabel, a mentally ill man, put their bodies in the refrigerator and freezer and continued to live in the apartment for several weeks before leaving town. When he found out that the bodies had been discovered he turned himself into the police and confessed. He was playing with a new gun when he shot his wife, apparently unmotivated, and shot his daughter because her mother was dead and her father would most definitely be going to prison.

Mr. Vrabel, a severe schizophrenic, was committed to a psychiatric hospital for four years after the murders before he was found competent to stand trial, though he refused to participate in an evaluation to determine competency because he felt the doctors were conspiring against him. He refused to assist in his own defense, and forbid his lawyers from presenting mitigation evidence or evidence concerning his mental illness. Several times during trial and pre-trial he fired his lawyers and decided to represent himself. His lawyers were re-hired on the first day of trial.

The record demonstrates bizarre actions of Mr. Vrabel at the time of the crime; a long period of psychiatric hospitalization to restore him to competency for trial; agreement by a number of psychiatric professionals that he suffered mental illness; inconsistent but repeated demands by him to represent himself based on the belief that appointed counsel were part of a larger conspiracy against him; repeated bizarre outbursts and behaviors during the trial; his refusal to offer mitigating evidence at the penalty phase; his denial of the existence of mental illness or any other mitigating factor, thereby effectively inviting the jury to recommend a death sentence; and his request to trial counsel to stand silent at sentencing.

Courts have upheld the conviction and sentence of Mr. Vrabel, insisting that he was competent to stand trial and represent himself. “On the record before us,” Ohio Supreme Court Chief Justice Thomas Moyer wrote for the dissenting minority, “I cannot conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that Vrabel’s mental illness did not causally contribute to his tragic criminal conduct, thereby reducing his moral culpability to a level inconsistent with the imposition of the ultimate penalty of death.” There are compelling reasons for not executing capital offenders who suffer debilitating mental illnesses that are similar to the reasons society will no longer tolerate the execution of the mentally retarded. In the past year, over 10 people with severe and diagnosed mental illness have been executed.

The United States is in violation of international law and worldwide human rights standards in allowing those suffering from mental illness to be executed. In 1997, the UN Special Rapporteur on Extrajudicial, Summary or Arbitrary Executions stated that governments that continue to use the death penalty "with respect to minors and the mentally ill are particularly called upon to bring their domestic legislation into conformity with international legal standards."

In April 2000, the UN Commission on Human Rights urged all states that maintain the death penalty "not to impose it on a person suffering from any form of mental disorder; not to execute any such person."

Please take a moment and e-mail or fax Gov. Bob Taft and urge him to stop the execution of Stephen Vrabel and to support legislation that would ban the execution of all those suffering from mental illness. Please further urge him to support legislation that would increase the provision of mental health services to those who cannot afford them.

Stephen Allen Vrabel Clemency Hearing

IN RE: STEPHEN ALLEN VRABEL A313-033
STATE OF OHIO ADULT PAROLE AUTHORITY
COLUMBUS, OHIO

Date of Meeting: June 25, 2004 - Minutes of the SPECIAL MEETING of the Adult Parole Authority held at 1030 Alum Creek Drive, Columbus, Ohio 43205 on the date indicated above.

SUBJECT: Death Penalty Clemency

CRIME/CONVICTION: 1) Aggravated Murder with firearm specification and specification of aggravating circumstances. 2) Aggravated Murder with firearm specification and specification of aggravating circumstances.

DATE, PLACE OF CRIME: 3/3/89, Struthers, Ohio

COUNTY: Mahoning

CASE NUMBER: 94CR789

VICTIM: 1) Susan Clemente 2) Lisa Clemente

INDICTMENT: 1) Aggravated Murder with firearm specification and specification of aggravating circumstances. 2) Aggravated Murder with firearm specification and specification of aggravating circumstances.

TRIAL: By Jury

VERDICT: Found guilty as charged by jury of both counts

SENTENCE: Death on both counts

ADMITTED TO INSTITUTION: October 20, 1995

TIME SERVED: 104 months prison time served

AGE AT ADMISSION: 39 years old (DOB: 10/15/56)

JAIL TIME CREDIT: 10 days

PAROLE ELIGIBILTY: N/A

PRESIDING JUDGE: Honorable R. Scott Krichbaum

PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: James Philomena
ASSISTANT PROSECUTING ATTORNEY: Ken Bailey

ACCOMPLICE: None

FOREWARD

The Honorable Bob Taft, Governor of the State of Ohio, and the Ohio Parole Board, pursuant to Section 2967.03 of the Ohio Revised Code, and Parole Board Policy 105-PBD-01, in this case initiated clemency. A Death Row Clemency Review Hearing was conducted on June 25, 2004, with eight members of the Ohio Parole Board participating.

Attorney John B. Juhasz was present to represent the inmate, Stephen Vrabel. Co-counsel Mary Jane Stephens was unable to attend. His purpose was to assist the inmate in preventing clemency from being recommended. Vrabel did not request and does not want clemency.

Present at the hearing on behalf of the State were Henry Appel, Assistant Attorney General acting as Special Prosecuting Attorney for Mahoning County, and Timothy Prichard Assistant Attorney General acting as Special Prosecuting Attorney for Mahoning County. Family and friends of the victims were present and representatives of the family, Ms. Rita Sakara, the victims’ aunt/great aunt, Alex Clemente the victim’s brother/uncle, and Linda Aey, the victim’s sister/aunt, gave testimony.

After review and deliberating upon the information provided, the Ohio Parole Board voted and reached a unanimous decision. We now submit to the Honorable Bob Taft, Governor of the State of Ohio our report and recommendation.

INSTANT OFFENSE:

The following account of the instant offense was obtained from the Ohio Supreme Court’s review of this case on July 2, 2003, via appeal as of right, whereupon said court affirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the Mahoning County Court of Common Pleas .

Defendant Stephen Vrabel and Susan Clemente lived together in an apartment they rented from Susan’s sister and brother-in-law in Struthers, Ohio. Although not married, they had a child, Lisa, who was born in 1985. On March 3, 1989 Mr. Vrabel went into the Miller Rod & Gun Store in Youngstown, Ohio to purchase a gun. He selected a gun but was told he could not purchase it as his license had expired. Later that afternoon, he returned to the gun shop with a valid Ohio ID card and purchased a Jennings .22 semi-automatic handgun and ammunition. There was no waiting period to purchase it at that time. During the visit he appeared to be calm and did not seem nervous, anxious or intoxicated.

Mr. Vrabel later told police that he had bought the gun for no particular reason except that he had always wanted one. When he returned to the apartment he loaded the gun and put it in the hallway closet. He began drinking beer heavily and smoking marijuana. He maintained that there was no confrontation between him and Susan. Nevertheless he retrieved the loaded gun and pointed it at Susan as she was walking to the kitchen. He fired one shot at her head; she fell face down, moaning. Lisa began “freaking out”. Defendant then thought to himself that he did not want Susan to suffer so he shot her in the head again as she lay on the kitchen floor. While trying to calm Lisa, he surmised that since Lisa’s mother was dead and her father would now go to prison, Lisa would be better off dead. He fired one shot at Lisa’s head and “felt that she died immediately”.

Defendant left the apartment with the gun and checked into a motel in Liberty Township where he spent the night. The next morning he drove Susan’s 1976 Plymouth to Wheeling West Virginia and left it there. He took a Greyhound Bus to Columbus, Ohio and spent the night at a hotel near the Ohio State University campus. The following morning he took a bus back to Wheeling, picked up Susan’s car and drove back to his apartment in Struthers. He poured floor stripper over the bodies because they smelled and slept in the apartment that night.

The next day he wrapped the bodies in blankets and sheets. He emptied the refrigerator and put Susan’s body in the refrigerator and Lisa’s body in the freezer compartment. He put two of Lisa’s favorite stuffed animals in the freezer with her. He then tried to clean the blood off the floor with several household-cleaning agents. He cut out a blood stained portion of the hallway carpet and disposed of it in the apartment dumpster.

During the rest of March, 1989 he continued to live in the Struthers’s apartment. Susan’s sister, Linda Aey, attempted to visit Susan at the apartment several times in order to collect the rent for March. On one occasion, defendant opened the back window and told Linda that Susan and Lisa were not feeling well. Another time, he told Linda that Lisa and Susan were at the grocery store. On each occasion he seemed fine to Linda. On April 4, 1989 Mr. Vrabel again checked into a motel in Liberty Township.

The next night he spent the night at a motel in Austintown. Meanwhile Linda Aey’s husband, Michael Aey, went to Mr. Vrabel’s apartment in the early evening of April 5, 1989 to collect two months rent. As he went up the apartment stairs, he noticed the smell of cleaning fluids, and when he entered the apartment he saw it was “messed-up”. Before he left, he opened the refrigerator and discovered Susan’s body. Mr. Aey went home to call the police since there was no phone in the apartment

Upon arrival, police found the apartment to be a mess with beer cans in every room. During the investigation, police found Lisa’s body in the freezer compartment wrapped in a blanket, along with a pillow with gunshot residue on it. Police found three shell casings in plain view. The Deputy Corner later determined that both Susan and Lisa died from gunshot wounds to the head.

On the morning of April 6, 1989, Mr. Vrabel was driving Susan’s car to Parma when he heard on the radio that the bodies of Susan and Lisa had been discovered and police were looking for the victim’s boyfriend. Mr. Vrabel went to St. Charles Catholic Church in Parma and approached the pastor, Father Carlin. He told Father Carlin he had been involved in the homicide of his wife and child. Father Carlin accompanied him to the Parma Police Department. Parma Police advised him of his rights and he gave an oral statement. He admitted shooting Susan and Lisa but claimed not to know why he shot Susan. He said the gun used was in the back seat of the Plymouth in a gray duffel bag. Police obtained a search warrant and found the gun where he said it would be.

Parma Police informed Struthers Police that they had Mr. Vrabel in custody. Struthers Police also advised him of his rights, that he waived, before giving a statement. When asked what caused the offense, Vrabel responded “Sometimes when I drink, things happen.” He admitted committing the murders and described to police the events surrounding the murders and his actions during the month leading up to his surrender and arrest in Parma.

Following his indictment for Aggravated Murder in 1989, the court appointed a mental health professional, who found Mr. Vrabel incompetent to stand trial. He was committed to the Timothy B. Moritz Center in 1990, where he remained until 1994. On August 30, 1994, the Western Reserve Psychiatric Hospital notified the Mahoning County Prosecutor that the defendant was competent to stand trial and had no active mental illness .

PRIOR RECORD: 5-3-83, Disorderly Conduct Youngstown, OH
6-12-85 DUI Youngstown, OH
12-6-85 DUI Cuyahoga Falls, OH

INSTITUTIONAL ADJUSTMENT:

A review of the Mansfield Correctional Institution Unit file indicates one severe conduct violation (3/19/99-Possession of Weapon) in an otherwise acceptable institutional adjustment history.

PROPONENTS TO CLEMENCY:

The Ohio Parole Board received no written application for clemency on Stephen Vrabel’s behalf. Mr. Vrabel’s representatives, John Juhasz and Mary Jane Stephens, notified the Board of his desire not to be interviewed. At the June 25, 2004 hearing the Board was told that he did not request nor did he deserve clemency consideration. As part of the review process, the Board discussed copies of competency reports from clinical psychologist, John M. Fabian, addressed to Greg Meyers and Joseph Wilhelm, dated March 16, 2004, and from Phillip J. Resnick, M.D., dated February 4, 2004, addressed to Assistant Attorney General Henry G. Appel. These reports were prepared to assess Mr. Vrabel’s competence to waive appeals, as well as, competency to be executed. These may shed light upon the inmate’s current position of resistance to clemency consideration.

Phillip J. Resnick, MD concluded that Mr. Vrabel: • Gave clean and logical reasons for preferring to have the death penalty. • Has a comprehensive understanding of his legal position. • Has stated that if he were choosing between prison and freedom he would not choose death. He does not want to live in prison and freedom is not one of the choices. • Has a clear understanding of the ramifications of his decision. • Has spoken of donating body organs. He understands the irreversibility of death. • Has consistently,for nine years, voiced a desire for the death penalty rather that life in prison and denied mitigation to preclude death. • Can weigh the advantages and disadvantages of obtaining further appeals. • Does not desire to commit suicide as he lacks the means of assuring he could complete the action in his current circumstances. • Believes he would have approximately 1 year of life prior to execution and could change his mind during that time. • Though there is a history of paranoid delusion, none are currently evident. • No hallucinations reported; that would have served as an irrational basis for his decision to forego appeals. • Has a measured IQ in the average range and no mental retardation. • No signs of confusion about the decision to waive appeals • No signs of depression to distort reasoning about the decision to abandon further appeals.

OPPONENTS TO CLEMENCY:

Tim Prichard and Henry Appel, Assistant Attorney Generals acting as Special Prosecuting Attorneys for Mahoning County, represented the State of Ohio at the hearing before the Parole Board on June 25, 2004.

Arguments in opposition to the granting of Executive Clemency included: • The brutality of the crime • The vulnerability of the victims-One only 3 1/2 years old • The senselessness of the crime-No explanation of it has been given • His role as father and husband of the victims • He is not asking for clemency • Vrabel initially tried to avoid conviction by a defiant resistance to clinical assessment. This resulted in a finding of incompetence to stand trial, and transfer to a forensic facility. In the 14 clinical assessments that have followed that initial assessment, he has not been found to be incompetent. Any mental disturbance or illness is in remission and he has recently been deemed to be competent to waive any further appeals. • There is no question of his guilt. He confessed to police and was subsequently found guilty by jury. On 10-12-95, the jury recommended death on each of 2 counts.

Family members’ representatives, Linda Aey, Rita Sakara and Alex Clemente, were given and opportunity to speak to the Board. They shared their sadness and sense of loss at the death of Susan and Lisa Clemente. The surviving children of Susan Clemente were present and the ongoing grief surrounding the senseless deaths was evident. This had been the family’s first opportunity to disclose their pain and give their opinions in the recommendation being contemplated by the Board. Letters in support of the family and in opposition to clemency were shared with the Board.

CONCLUSION:

The Parole Board reviewed the documents and deliberated extensively on the information ,as well as, the oral testimony provided. The inmate does not want clemency and no mercy appears warranted. There is no manifest injustice in denying Executive Clemency. Significant mitigation as found by the Ohio Supreme Court dissenters, is greatly outweighed by the aggravating circumstances of a double murder, including his own 3 1/2 year old daughter. Mental illness did not preclude the imposition of the death sentence, and there is information to show no sign of major mental illness. There is some evidence to suggest the possibility of malingering in the past, but no current evidence of mental defect.

Accordingly, the undersigned members concur with the imposition of the death penalty in this case and find that the exercise of clemency is not warranted.

RECOMMENDATION:

The Ohio Parole Board with eight (8) members participating, by a vote of eight (8) to zero (0) recommends to the Honorable Bob Taft, Governor of the State of Ohio, that Executive Clemency be denied in the case of Stephen Allen Vrabel #313-033.

Ohio executes man who killed girlfriend, daughter in 1989

By Jim Provance - The Toledo Blade

July 15, 2004

LUCASVILLE - Stephen A. Vrabel calmly and voluntarily went to his death yesterday for shooting his girlfriend and their 3-year-old daughter in 1989 and living a month in their apartment with their bodies in the refrigerator.

The 47-year-old bald, bearded man looked at his sister, Karen Koval, and smiled, as she mouthed the words "I love you" through the glass separating them. "I want to thank my sister for all the joy and happiness she has brought into [daughter] Lisa's life, and I want to apologize to anyone I may have wronged in my life," he said shortly before a triple cocktail of drugs was used to sedate him, paralyze his lungs, and stop his heart.

"[Wednesday] is all about Susan and Lisa Clemente, the victims of this horrible and devastating tragedy, and that justice has been served upon the person who brutally murdered them," said Kenneth Kotouch, Susan's brother-in-law and Lisa's uncle. "There were no winners today," he said. "There was only justice."

Dropping all appeals and refusing to seek Gov. Bob Taft's clemency, the former Struthers (Mahoning County) man spent the last night of his life watching the American League rout the National League in the All-Star Game.

With Vrabel's execution, Ohio quietly set a record with five so far this year, the most in a single year since the state resumed carrying out the death penalty in 1999. A sixth, also a "volunteer," is set for Tuesday. In all, 13 death-row inmates have been executed by lethal injection since 1999.

After the Ohio Supreme Court voted 4-3 to uphold his conviction and sentence, Vrabel dropped his federal appeals, hastening his execution.

He never explained why he bought a gun on March 3, 1989, and killed his 29-year-old live-in girlfriend. But he told police he shot their hysterical daughter, Lisa, because he felt she would be better off dead with her mother dead and her father going to prison. He poured floor stripper over their bodies and later placed his girlfriend's body in the refrigerator and his daughter's in the freezer along with two of her favorite stuffed animals. He lived off and on in the apartment until the bodies were discovered. "The crimes are no doubt horrendous, but it took him five years in a mental institution to get to the point where he was competent to stand trial," said Neal Kookoothe, a Toledo native and North Olmstead priest who was outside the Southern Ohio Correctional Institution.

"VRABEL TRANSCRIPT: Stephen speaks."

Youngstown Vindicator

July 13, 2004

Ohio Legislative Correspondents Association pool interview Friday afternoon (Michael J. Maurer, ThisWeek Newspapers) at Mansfield Correctional Institution with Stephen Vrabel, formerly of Struthers, who is scheduled to be executed Wednesday.

O: As I understand it, you had at one time decided not to speak to the press and then you changed your mind and decided to speak to the press.

V: Well, actually, what I did, was I left it, I just said, I signed a form saying I would speak to the press, but I didn't know this was the press. I didn't know what this was.

O: So what was your thought process in deciding to speak with us?

V: Nothing. I don't know.

O: Is there anything you most want to say, that you want people to know, or read about?

V: Just that I was convicted by a, uh, in an unconstitutional manner. People think that the courts are free from, ah ... I was convicted by a prosecutor that was thrown in, ah, prison. James Philomena was convicted of, ah ... the kinda ... I don't know if you're aware, they had a, a thing in Mahoning County where they busted a bunch of prosecutors and judges and police and stuff like that. My prosecutor was, ah, ... convicted actually of fixing cases, and I think he's in state prison now after he served time in federal prison.

O: You are convicted of two murders, the murder of your wife, common law wife, and your daughter, Susan and Lisa. Do you admit to those crimes?

V: Well, I will say this to you. When I went back to court in 1995, my attorneys entered a not guilty by reason of insanity plea. I entered a not guilty plea. I then became my own attorney, and I entered a not guilty plea to the indictment. Then the attorneys entered another not guilty by reason of insanity plea. So if I would have been my own attorney, I would have presented a case where I was not guilty to the charges. That could mean I'm not guilty of anything to do with it or I'm guilty of just something that happened instantaneously and it would be, ah, not be aggravated murder. But I wouldn't speak any further on that because I don't, I never know what's going to happen. In other words, I don't know, although I'm waiving my appeals. I seriously doubt the governor would grant me clemency, and I don't think anybody's going to interfere. I don't know if someone's going to interfere, file something on my behalf, delay this, for all I know I might change my mind and go to court one day, so that's as much as I would speak on that.

O: So you don't want to say, in case circumstances change, in case you do change your mind?

V: Right.

O: Are you denying the murders or something else?

V: All I'm saying is, I entered a not guilty plea to what I was indicted on.

O: What is your understanding of the process over the next five days or so?

V: I just ... I don't know. I don't know what you mean, how specifically?

O: Well, what do you anticipate? You're scheduled for execution July 14. ...

V: I think that will happen. I'm pretty sure that will happen. But I'm not ... you know, there's never a 100 percent guarantee.

O: And is it your understanding that this depends at least in part on your decision whether to go forward?

V: I imagine ... I don't know. I don't know if they would allow me to change my mind at this point in time. ... Who knows?"

O: I understand you have a sister?

V: Yeah.

O: Do you have any other siblings or other living relatives?

V: I have relatives, aunts and uncles.

O: Tell me a little bit about Susan, what kind of person she was, what her good points were and her bad points.

V: I'd rather not get into that.

O: Describe for me your life after leaving the military.

V: I was ah, I, you know, I had, ah, worked for a while, first I went to school, and then I didn't like the, ah, career choice I had made, so then I worked for a while and then I went back to school. It was, it was fine.

O: Can you describe Lisa's personality to me a little bit?

V: She was a perfect child. Not like some child, children, um, they cry a lot, she never, she was just happy. She was born premature. I don't know if, um, somehow she sensed how lucky she was to have made it because she was really tiny when she was born. She was just a happy child. She never threw tantrums or, ah ... I mean, we went to the zoo one time, after we were there for about five or six hours, after we went back into the car, she would get mad, she might, you know, cry for about 10 seconds, and then, she wouldn't ... she was a young child, she wouldn't cry or anything like that.

O: Do you have a favorite memory of Lisa?

V: I have lots of favorite memories of her.

O: And how about Susan?

V: I suppose I have favorite memories of her too.

O: What do you remember about Susan's other children from her prior marriage?

V: I didn't know them that well.

O: What kind of contact did you have with them?

V: Very little.

O: Did they visit with their mother?

V: I'd rather not get into all that.

O: Have you had contact with her family?

V: I understand the family requested the parole board to maybe ask to, ask me why this happened. And you know, uh, I'm glad, from what I understand that's been denied (turns to prison guard) I don't know if you know about that? But, um, the only thing I would ask is why they would choose that forum and not ever try and contact me and ask if they don't, they, you know, want to know why, I would try and contact them, you know what I'm saying? If I thought you had killed someone in my family and I wanted to know why, I would try and contact you and ask you why. I wouldn't wait to make a spectacle of it at the last minute, you know.

O: Have they ever tried to contact you?

V: No.

O: Would you speak with them if ...

V: No. I have nothing to say to those people. I feel sorry for Susan's children, that they never got to know their mother, but her family, I have nothing to say to those people.

O: Do you feel you were sane at the time of, that you were ...

V: I don't think I've ever been insane in my life. I think sometimes, ah, I think, ah, there's no history of mental illness from, ah, years I was in the military or any job I had or when I was going to college, and I was always either working or going to school or something you know, and so I was always intermingling with people, you know, with people, and nobody ever said, told me that I that they felt I needed to see a psychiatrist.

And as far as, you know, you have, shock, or something from right after the incident and then as far as, you know, maybe there's problems in prison or something like that. Anybody can lose their mind in prison. I think a lot of times things can be misinterpreted. I think, I think I just have some, uh, you know a lot of paranoia, mistrust of the legal system, the legal system in Mahoning County that was found to have judges, police officers, prosecutors, lawyers, all convicted on corruption charges. I have, you know, and I have some paranoia in prison, I mean if you don't have any paranoia in prison there's something wrong with you. I don't believe I've ever had any severe mental illness.

O: At the time, in March of 1989, were you then distrustful of the local police and judicial system?

V: Yes. I knew some people who had their cases fixed.

O: Do you think your life would be different today or things would have been different at that time if there had been a waiting period to buy the gun?

V: Well, it's hard to say. I, uh, if there had been a waiting period I would still purchase the gun. The main reasons behind purchasing the gun is I was going to night school the next quarter, and, uh, there had been some strange sightings in the back yard, our back yard, the back of our apartment was here and there was woods back there. And there were some people coming trough there, you know, through the back, sitting in the back, it was just something that made me nervous. It made my wife nervous more than me.

O: The bodies were ultimately found in the refrigerator.

V: Well, after this happened, I went to the library, and I thought, somehow, at first I thought I could bring Lisa back to life or something like that, I don't know, I don't know what I was thinking, and I was reading and it said that decomposition was slowed by the cold. So that, that's what that was all about.

O: I'm sorry. Say that again.

V: Decomposition was slowed by cold.

O: And why was that important?

V: Obviously I didn't want them dead. If I wanted them dead, I would've ... I don't think I would've just stayed there with them.

O: Does it make sense to you that a stranger to you and your case would say, "That leads me to think this man might have mental problems of some sort."

V: Well, I can understand that, yeah.

O: Why does that make sense to you? Why does that seem like a reasonable question to ask?

V: Well, it's, I suppose bizarre. It's not the normal thing to do. You know, the aftermath.

O: When you confessed to the police, did that help your grieving process? Did that make you feel better?

V: My, again, again, my intent to confess to the police was that I thought if I confessed to the police and, uh, they would, I could go ahead and be executed shortly thereafter and be, you know, reunited with my daughter, that was my, uh, my belief at that time.

O: Why do you feel you know more than anybody?

V: I don't think the police know much of anything. I really don't. The police only know what I either told them or what they made up on their own. They don't even know the time of death. The police know very little. Her family doesn't know anything.

O: How often have you left, when is the last time you left this prison?

V: To go back to court March 2004.

O: During your clemency hearing the argument was raised, and it's been raised in newspaper stories, that you ought not have the choice to be put to death, that the state has a separate responsibility and that it shouldn't be enough for you to say, "I waive appeals." How do you feel about that? Should you be able to waive appeals?

V: I believe this is America, and as an American citizen, the courts have found that an individual is allowed to waive his appeals. So if they don't like that, then I would suggest they get that changed through the courts.

O: So do you think either the state through a judge or through someone coming into court should have the right to come in and stop your execution?

V: No.

O: Why?

V: Because I believe our constitution is based on individual liberties. The Bill of Rights is based on individual liberties and I believe, you know, my individual liberty supersedes the government's, ah, is that what you were asking?

O: I'm just trying to elicit your thoughts on the death penalty and your circumstances, so it's more, if it's not something you've thought about it, you don't have to answer.

V: I'm not sure.

O: There's an incongruity, to me, it seems, on the one hand you say you want to be put to death, but on the other hand you're saying this penalty is not valid and it's not valid in your case. So I'm just getting your thoughts on those two things.

V: Well ...

O: In a sense, you're taking advantage of something you disagree with.

V: Exactly. But, just because I say it's invalid doesn't mean I can prove it's invalid. Do you know what I mean? If I could prove it's invalid, that would be another, another story.

O: You have alluded to this yourself already, but the biggest question that I've been able to discern from the file and people outside this room, is, why? Why were these two people killed?

V: I, I would rather not get into that.

O: How is your life different from someone who is outside the prison system?

V: Well, you get to choose what you want to eat, what you want to do, I don't have any choice. My life is watching TV. I mean, I'm not saying ... there's a lot of good shows on TV, I never really watched that much TV, and there's a lot of good shows on TV that, you know, time goes by quickly, it's not as though I'm utterly bored and going batty counting the bricks. There's a lot of decent things on TV, and fortunately we're provided with a lot of TV channels.

O: You seem a thoughtful man. I gather you've spent a lot of time studying your case.

V: Yes.

O: Have you developed other interests? History? Politics? Sociology? Have you been able to spend time doing that?

V: Well, I can't read anymore. I have blurred vision. I don't know if it's from medication I'm on, or just as we get older, you know, but I think it's the medication, because when I was on medication back in the early '90s I had blurred vision then. Then it went away. So I can't really read that much. But, well, you know, when I was able to read, I would get the U.S. Supreme Court decisions and, um, there would be one or two decisions in the big thick book that dealt with me, and before turning it in I would look at it, page through and read every case, read the synopsis of every case. I found that fascinating reading, the Supreme Court decisions

O: I guess my last question then, for me, there's something incongruous about on the one hand being found incompetent to stand trial and yet, within an awfully close time frame being found competent to be responsible for the crime. What's your response to that? How do you reconcile those things?

V: Probably because I didn't want to talk to those people, the examiners, you know, like when they sent me to (unintelligible) I didn't want to talk to them. Um, I think when they see something like that, an individual says, "Well, you know, just put me to death," they feel that is incompetency. And then they hear an individual talking about, well, I don't trust these lawyers, these lawyers are corrupt, this, that and the other thing, and you know, then they had me living in the house with bodies. I think because they had me living in the house with bodies, you know, that, to an average person, well, an expert or an average person, that's an indicator that something isn't clicking on all cylinders.

O: How about to you?

V: Well, it just depends on who's dead. If it was you, a stranger that I never met in my life, and I was living with you and you were in my refrigerator, then I would say that that's not kosher. But if it's someone you care about, it's not as bizarre.

O: You then feel, you're not admitting to the crime, but you do feel that you were sane, you were competent at the time the events occurred?

V: Well if you force lawyers on me, I'm never competent. When I went back, I was found incompetent, then I was found competent, and then I went to trial with lawyers I didn't trust and didn't speak to, how can you defend yourself? If you were brought up on charges of falsifying material for your newspaper and they brought you up on charges and they appointed someone to defend you and you didn't trust this individual and you didn't speak to this individual, how fair do you think that would be? But if I was allowed to be my own attorney, it's fair because I trust myself.

O: This will be the last opportunity for me to ask, and again I've asked the question before, but is there a reason why your wife and daughter died?

V: I can't comment on that.

Family prepares for execution of killer

By Joe Milicia - The Canton Repository

AP - July 11, 2004

STRUTHERS — Stephen Vrabel still refuses to say why he shot his girlfriend in the head, then stuffed her body in his refrigerator 15 years ago. During an interview Friday at the Mansfield Correctional Institute, Vrabel wouldn’t discuss the circumstances leading to the shootings of his girlfriend and their 3-year-old daughter, Lisa, but didn’t deny killing them. He is scheduled to be executed Wednesday. Vrabel said he doesn’t owe anyone, including the family of his girlfriend, Susan Clemente, an explanation. “I have nothing to say to those people,” he said.

For Clemente’s family, the reason she was killed is no longer important. They simply want Vrabel to be executed. Seventeen members of Clemente’s family and two close family friends from Naples, Fla., plan to travel to Lucasville for Vrabel’s execution Wednesday. Vrabel dropped his appeals and asked to be put to death. “I’d rather be dead than be alive in prison,” he said Friday.

The tight-knit Clemente family has relied on each other to live through their grief. They’re doing the same to get through Vrabel’s execution. Six family members will witness the lethal injection, the maximum number the state will permit, including Susan’s father, son, two brothers and two brother-in-laws. “This could have tore all of us apart, but it didn’t,” said Linda Aey, Susan’s sister. “We just helped each other. We’re close and we love each other.”

Anthony and Norma Clemente have spent 49 years in the house where they raised Susan and their four other children. It’s in a Struthers neighborhood of modest, well-kept homes that don’t reflect the tough economic times in the Youngstown area. Struthers is the same suburb where Vrabel shot 29-year-old Susan and their daughter on March 3, 1989, with a handgun he bought that day. Prosecutors never established a motive.

On Friday, Vrabel said he bought the gun to protect his family after hearing that strangers were walking through his back yard and the woods near where they lived. “The notion that I purchased that gun with the intent of murdering my family, I just tell you that’s not valid,” he said.

At the time, Vrabel told police he didn’t know why he shot Susan. He said with their 3-year-old daughter “freaking out” at the sight, he shot her in the head, figuring it was best because her mother was dead and he was going to jail. He fled their apartment, but returned days after the killings and placed Susan’s body in the refrigerator and Lisa’s in the freezer along with her favorite stuffed animals, a bear and a bunny.

Vrabel said Friday he had hoped to slow their decomposition and increase the chances they could be resuscitated. “Part of the reason for the bodies in the refrigerator was a belief that they would come back to life,” he said. “Now I don’t know if that was from psychotic depression.” Vrabel continued to live in the apartment for a month. During that time, he completed final exams in two courses he was taking at Youngstown State University. He got an “A” on his sociology exam. The bodies were discovered when Susan’s brother-in-law, Michael Aey, went to the apartment to collect overdue rent money. Vrabel was driving in suburban Cleveland when he heard of the discovery. He stopped at a church and confessed to a priest and then to police.

Vrabel was always a quiet man, according to the Clemente family. They said Susan seemed to be happy during their relationship. The family never saw any potential for violence. “You never saw that in him,” said Norma Clemente, Susan’s mother. After spending five years at a psychiatric center, Vrabel was ruled competent to stand trial in 1995 and was convicted of two counts of aggravated murder. A divided Ohio Supreme Court upheld Vrabel’s death sentence by a 4-3 vote last year. Chief Justice Thomas Moyer argued that Vrabel didn’t fall into the category of killers for whom the state’s death penalty was reserved because of his mental health problems.

Vrabel, 47, would be the second Ohio death row inmate to voluntarily abandon court appeals to speed his execution since the state resumed executions in 1999 with Wilford Berry, who was called “The Volunteer.” Ohio has executed 11 other men since then, including four this year.

Convicted killer gets his wish to be executed

By Anita Chang - The Canton Repository

AP - Thursday, July 15, 2004

LUCASVILLE — A man executed Wednesday for killing his girlfriend and their daughter smiled at his sister while strapped to the gurney, after she blew him a kiss and whispered “I love you.” Stephen Vrabel, 47, was pronounced dead eight minutes later, at 10:14 a.m. at the Southern Ohio Correctional Facility. He was the second death row inmate since 1999 to drop his appeals to speed his execution.

Authorities said Vrabel shot Susan Clemente, 29, his girlfriend of about four years, and 3-year-old Lisa Clemente in their heads, on March 3, 1989, at their apartment in the Youngstown suburb of Struthers. He had bought the handgun that day.

“I want to thank my sister for all the joy and happiness she brought into Lisa’s life and I want to apologize to anyone I may have wronged in my life,” Vrabel, speaking in a clear voice, said in his final statement. Vrabel’s sister, Karen Koval, sobbed quietly throughout the execution and leaned on her son, Greg Koval. Susan Clemente’s father, son, two brothers and two brothers-in-law also witnessed the execution. The men were silent and did not show any emotion. After giving his statement, Vrabel began blinking rapidly, and after the drugs took effect, he breathed deeply three times, gasped twice, then took a series of shallow breaths. His Adam’s apple bobbed up and down several times, and then he was still. The execution team had trouble inserting a shunt into Vrabel’s right arm before the execution and finally got it in after several tries.

One of Clemente’s brothers-in-law addressed the media afterward, joined by 18 other family members and friends. “Susan and Lisa Clemente have finally been put to rest after 15 years of legal battles with the court system. They both can rest in peace now knowing that this nightmare has finally come to an end,” Kenneth Kotouch said, standing near poster-sized photographs of the victims. “There were no winners today, there was only justice,” he said.

Vrabel spent most of Tuesday evening watching Major League Baseball’s All-Star game on television, prison system spokesman Larry Greene said. Vrabel also visited with his sister and nephew. Vrabel, who confessed to the killings, voluntarily dropped appeals on his two murder convictions to speed his execution. He was the 13th man executed since 1999, including four others this year. Gov. Bob Taft on Monday declined to stop Vrabel’s scheduled execution. The Ohio Parole Board earlier voted against recommending clemency.

Vrabel has never said why he shot Susan Clemente. He said he shot their daughter — whom he described Friday as a “perfect child” — because she was “freaking out” about her mother’s death and he thought killing her was best because her mother was dead and he was going to jail. After the shootings, Vrabel fled the apartment but returned days later and placed Clemente’s body in the refrigerator and Lisa’s in the freezer along with her favorite stuffed animals, a bear and a bunny. Vrabel continued to live in the apartment for a month.

A relative of Clemente’s found the bodies when he went to the apartment to collect overdue rent money. When he learned of the discovery, Vrabel confessed to a priest and then to police. After spending five years at a psychiatric center, Vrabel was ruled competent to stand trial in 1995 and was convicted of aggravated murder.

At trial, Vrabel’s attorneys tried to prove that he was insane and could not distinguish between right and wrong. Numerous issues were raised in his appeal, including that he was incompetent to stand trial. Vrabel had delusions that his attorneys were acting as spies, according to a 1990 psychiatrist’s report. When Vrabel was later found competent, one expert concluded that Vrabel had faked his mental illness to avoid prosecution.

Vrabel will be buried today in a state-owned cemetery in Chillicothe, Greene said.

State v. Vrabel, 790 N.E.2d 303 (Ohio 2003) (Direct Appeal).

Defendant was convicted in the Court of Common Pleas, Mahoning County, Case No. 94 CR 789, of two counts of aggravated murder, and was sentenced to death. Defendant appealed. The Court of Appeals affirmed, and defendant again appealed. The Supreme Court, Alice Robie Resnick, J., held that: (1) defendant was properly found competent to stand trial; (2) defendant received effective assistance of counsel at all phases of trial; (3) trial court properly permitted defendant to waive presentation of mitigating evidence; (4) trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying defendant's untimely request to represent himself; (5) prospective jurors were not subject to challenge for cause; (6) gruesome autopsy and crime scene photographs were admissible; and (7) sentence of death was appropriate. Affirmed. Moyer, C.J., dissented with opinion in which Pfeifer and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., joined.

On April 10, 1989, appellant, Stephen Vrabel, was indicted by a grand jury on two counts of aggravated murder in the deaths of Susan and Lisa Clemente, each carrying a death-penalty specification alleging that the murders were committed as a course of conduct involving the killing or attempt to kill two or more persons.

I. Facts and Case History

Appellant and Susan Clemente lived together in an apartment they rented from Susan's sister and brother-in-law in Struthers, Ohio. Although appellant and Susan were not married, they had a child, Lisa, who was born in 1985.

On March 3, 1989, appellant went into the Miller Rod and Gun Store in Youngstown, Ohio, to purchase a gun. He selected a gun; however, when appellant produced his driver's license for identification, he was told he could not make the purchase because his license had expired.

Later that afternoon, appellant returned to the gun shop with a valid Ohio ID card. He then purchased a Jennings .22 semiautomatic handgun and ammunition; at that time, there was no waiting period to purchase it. During his visit to the gun shop, appellant appeared to be calm and did not seem nervous, anxious, or intoxicated.

Appellant later told police that he had bought the gun for no particular reason except that he had always wanted one. When he returned to the apartment, he loaded the gun and put it in the hallway closet. He then began drinking beer heavily and smoking marijuana.

Appellant maintained that on the day of the murders, there was no confrontation between him and Susan. Nevertheless, appellant retrieved the loaded gun and pointed it at Susan as she was walking to the kitchen. He fired one shot at Susan's head, and she fell face down, moaning. Lisa began "freaking out."

Appellant then thought to himself that he did not want Susan to suffer, so he shot her in the head again as she lay on the kitchen floor. While trying to calm Lisa, appellant surmised that since Lisa's mother was dead and her father would now go to prison, Lisa would be better off dead. He fired one shot at Lisa's head and "felt that she died immediately."

Appellant then left the apartment with the gun and checked into a motel in Liberty Township, where he spent the night. The next morning, he drove Susan's 1976 Plymouth to Wheeling, West Virginia, and left it there. He then took a Greyhound bus to Columbus and spent the night at a hotel near the Ohio State University campus.

The following morning, appellant took a bus back to Wheeling, picked up Susan's car, and drove back to his apartment in Struthers. Appellant poured floor stripper over the bodies because they smelled and slept in the apartment that night.

The next day, appellant wrapped the bodies in blankets and sheets. He emptied the refrigerator and put Susan's body in the refrigerator and Lisa's body in the freezer compartment. He also put two of Lisa's favorite stuffed animals in the freezer with her. Appellant then tried to clean the blood off the floor with several household cleaning agents. He cut out a bloodstained portion of the hallway carpet and disposed of it in the apartment dumpster.

During the rest of March 1989, appellant continued to live in the Struthers apartment. Susan's sister, Linda Aey, attempted to visit Susan at the apartment several times in order to collect the March rent. On one occasion, appellant opened the back window and told Linda that Susan and Lisa were not feeling well. Another time, appellant told her that Susan and Lisa were at the grocery store. On each occasion, appellant seemed "fine" to Linda.

On April 4, 1989, appellant again checked into a motel in Liberty Township. The following night, he stayed at a motel in Austintown. Meanwhile, Linda's Aey's husband, Michael Aey, went to appellant's apartment in the early evening of April 5 to collect two months' rent. As he went up the apartment stairs, he noticed a smell of cleaning fluids. When he entered the apartment, he saw that it was "messed up." Before he left, he opened the refrigerator and discovered Susan's body. Aey went home and then to the police, since there was no telephone in the apartment.

On the morning of April 6, 1989, appellant was driving Susan's car to Parma when he heard on the radio that the bodies of Susan and Lisa had been discovered and that police were looking for the victim's boyfriend. He then went to St. Charles Catholic Church in Parma and approached the pastor, Father John T. Carlin. Appellant told Father Carlin that he had been involved in the homicides of his wife and child. Appellant asked Father Carlin to accompany him to the Parma police station.

Parma police informed Struthers police that they had appellant in custody. The Parma police advised him of his Miranda rights, which he waived. Appellant gave an oral statement that was then reduced to writing. He admitted shooting Susan and Lisa but claimed he did not know why he had shot Susan. He stated that the gun used in the shootings was in a gray duffel bag in the back seat of the Plymouth that he had parked outside the station. Police obtained a search warrant and found the gun where appellant said it would be.

Struthers police also advised appellant of his Miranda rights, which he again waived, before giving a statement. When asked what caused the incident, appellant responded, "Sometimes when I drink, things happen." He then admitted committing the murders and described to police the events surrounding the murders and his actions during the month leading up to his surrender and arrest in Parma.

Ballistics testing and comparisons made on the cartridge casings found in appellant's apartment, as well as the bullet fragments recovered in the autopsy of Susan Clemente, were consistent with the characteristics found on the bullets test-fired from the murder weapon belonging to appellant.

On April 10, 1989, the grand jury indicted appellant on two counts of aggravated murder, each carrying a death-penalty specification alleging that the murders were committed as a course of conduct involving the killing or attempt to kill two or more persons pursuant to R.C. 2929.04(A)(5) . Each count also carried a firearm specification.

Former R.C. 2945.37(A) provided: "A defendant is presumed competent to stand trial unless it is proved by a preponderance of the evidence in a hearing under this section that because of his present mental condition he is incapable of understanding the nature and objective of the proceedings against him or of presently assisting in his defense." Am.Sub.H.B. No. 565, 137 Ohio Laws, Part II, 2937, 2943.

Following appellant's indictment for aggravated murder in 1989, the trial court appointed mental health professionals to evaluate him, and psychologist Nancy Huntsman found appellant incompetent to stand trial. Appellant was committed to the Timothy B. Moritz Forensic Center in 1990 and remained there until 1994. On August 30, 1994, the Western Reserve Psychiatric Hospital notified the Mahoning County Prosecutor in a psychiatric report that appellant was then competent to stand trial and had no active mental illness.

Following his reindictment, both the state and defense agreed to have Dr. Otto Kausch examine appellant to evaluate his competency to stand trial. At a November 3, 1994 competency hearing, Dr. Kausch, a psychiatrist at Western Reserve Psychiatric Hospital, testified that, based upon a reasonable medical and psychiatric certainty, appellant possessed the capacity and willingness to assist in his own defense.

Dr. Kausch further observed that appellant has personality problems that may, under stress, cause him to act in ways that could be potentially disruptive to the trial proceedings. Dr. Kausch noted that while appellant was in the hospital, Dr. Phillip Resnick, a professor of psychiatry at Case Western Reserve University, and others examined him as well.

Taking into consideration all of the evaluations performed up to that time, Dr. Kausch concluded that appellant was malingering and that he was not mentally ill. At the conclusion of the hearing, the court held appellant competent to stand trial and ordered a mental exam pursuant to his plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. At a February 7, 1995 hearing on competency, both sides stipulated to the reports of Dr. Giannini and the Forensic Psychiatric Center of Northeast Ohio.

The court again declared appellant competent to stand trial. At that time, appellant also moved to withdraw his insanity plea.At a hearing on March 21, 1995, upon defendant's advisory counsel's motion, the court ordered appellant's competency to stand trial reevaluated.

At a March 24, 1995 hearing, the court admitted the report of Dr. Brian Sullivan, who concluded that appellant was competent to stand trial. Dr. Sullivan specifically found that appellant "is able to understand the charges against him and participate meaningfully in his defense." Also at that hearing, appellant acknowledged that his motion to change venue to the spirit world was "meant as a joke."

Subsequently, he entered another plea of not guilty by reason of insanity. Difficulties arose because of appellant's refusal to cooperate with mental health professionals who were appointed to evaluate his state of mind at the time of the crimes.

Eventually, appellant cooperated with two professionals. In a report dated August 24, 1995, Dr. Giannini stated that appellant "is capable of participating meaningfully in his own defense."

In a report dated August 29, 1995, Douglas Darnall, Ph.D., concluded that appellant "did not know the wrongfulness of his act" at the time of the murders, but "he is capable of working with his attorney and aiding in his defense, thought [sic] his cooperation will be erratic."

On September 12, 1995, trial began with the voir dire of prospective jurors. At trial, the state called numerous witnesses, and the defense presented several of its own in support of appellant's insanity defense. Dr. Douglas Darnall, a clinical psychologist called on behalf of the defense, testified that appellant "did not have the ability to conform to the confines of law [and] could not distinguish between right and wrong."

In rebuttal, the state presented Dr. James Giannini, who opined that appellant "was sane at the time of the commission of the two acts for which he is being charged. * * * [H]e did know the difference between right and wrong." After deliberation, the jury found appellant guilty as charged.

During the mitigation phase, appellant elected to present only his unsworn statement as evidence. During his unsworn statement, he said, "[B]asically what I am saying is there is nothing of a mitigatory factor that can outweigh the aggravating circumstances that occurred that most notably of two people's lives being wiped out."

The trial court instructed the jury on three mitigating factors: R.C. 2929.04(B)(3)--mental disease or defect, (B)(5)--lack of a significant history of criminal convictions, and (B)(7)--any other factors relevant to the issue of whether defendant should be sentenced to death. Appellant was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to death. The Court of Appeals for Mahoning County affirmed the conviction and sentence of death. Appellant appeals the judgment to this court as a matter of right.

Appellant has raised 13 propositions of law. We have reviewed each and have determined that none justifies reversal of appellant's convictions. We have also independently weighed the aggravating circumstances against the mitigating factors and have reviewed the death penalty for appropriateness and proportionality pursuant to R.C. 2929.05(A). For the following reasons, we affirm appellant's convictions and death sentence.

* * * *

In performing our independent weighing, we determined that the aggravating circumstances outweigh the mitigating factors beyond a reasonable doubt. The death penalty is both appropriate and proportionate when compared with capital cases with a course of conduct involving the purposeful killing or attempted killing of two or more persons. See, e.g., State v. Davie, (1997), 80 Ohio St.3d 311, 686 N.E.2d 245; State v. Lundgren (1995), 73 Ohio St.3d 474, 653 N.E.2d 304; and State v. Sowell (1988), 39 Ohio St.3d 322, 530 N.E.2d 1294.

For the foregoing reasons, we affirm appellant's convictions and death sentence. Judgment affirmed.

FRANCIS E. SWEENEY, SR., COONEY and O'CONNOR, JJ., concur.

MOYER , C.J., PFEIFER and LUNDBERG STRATTON, JJ., dissent.

Stephen Allen Vrabel