True Life: I’m Getting out of Prison
Are you leaving prison after serving your time? What will you be doing once you’ve regained your freedom? Will you be going home to your family and friends and trying to assimilate back into your old life? Or will you attempt to rebuild your life from scratch in a whole new place?
Are you worried about what the world beyond the fences and walls might have to offer you? Are you afraid to face the people you left behind? How will you handle this new-found freedom and the past you must revisit? If you are getting out of prison soon, MTV wants to hear from you.
If you appear to be between the ages of 18 and 28, and are leaving prison in the next few months, email us at: prison@mtvstaff.com with all of the details of your story.
True Life is MTV's award-winning documentary series that covers topics ranging from pop culture trends to breaking news issues. Using small handheld video cameras our True Life crews are able to blend into the background to capture life unscripted and untouched. This enables us to tell stories from the voices and points-of-view of our characters – putting the series in a unique position of reflecting the state of youth culture at any given moment.
True Life shows that have aired recently include: True Life: I Have Gay Parents, True Life: I’m On Steroids and True Life: I Autism
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
TIM HANCOCK GETS LWOP AFTER OHIO'S FIRST EVER MITIGATION ONLY TRIAL
Tim Hancock became the first person in Ohio to face a jury seated only to decide whether to impose death or a life sentence. Initially, Tim had been convicted and sentenced to death; but the Ohio Supreme Court reversed his death sentence and ordered a new mitigation-phase trial. The second jury voted for life without parole.
Tim Hancock went to prison in 1990 after pleading guilty to Aggravated Murder, a charge reduced from a capital felony-murder of an elderly woman.
On November 13, 2000, Tim was in the Segregation Unit ("the hole") of the Protective Custody Unit in Warren Correctional Institution. He killed his cellmate nine hours after prison officials forced him to accept a cellie. A year later, a jury convicted him and signed a death verdict predicated on two specifications: prior purposeful murder; murder while in detention.
The judge rejected the death verdict after learning that jurors had trial-phase evidence with them during mitigation-phase deliberations that the judge had ruled off limits. He imposed LWOP. He did not override the death verdict based on an independent weighing of the aggravators against the mitigators.
The prosecutor appealed. The District Appellate Court ruled that the spat over the evidence did not give reason to reject the death verdict, and ordered the trial judge to either accept or reject the death verdict on the merits. The judge imposed death.
Tim appealed. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, but remanded for a new mitigation phase trial to clean up the mess.
Tim became the first person under Ohio's 1981 capital statutes to face a jury seated only to consider whether death was appropriate. His trial began with the jurors being told they were bound to accept the first jury's finding of guilt on Aggravated Murder with two capital specifications. That ended the State's case in chief.
Tim presented mitigation on three fronts: Tim suffered from a serious mental illness that influenced his conduct during the murder, even though it fell short of an insanity defense that the first jury rejected; the prison's hands were dirty for violating their double-celling policy; the victim contributed to the cycle of events that led to murder.
Tim is a an extremely volatile man caught in the grip of a mental illness that causes sweeping mood changes, pathological paranoia, and occasional psychotic symptoms. The defense psychologist labeled it Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar type, and Borderline Personality Disorder. The prosecution's psychiatrist labeled it Borderline Personality Disorder co-existing with strong evidence of malingering by faking auditory and visual hallucinations. Both agreed that Tim's fifteen year history of mental-health treatment in prison painted the picture of a person with significant mental illness.
Tim's prison records depicted a person intolerant of gay men and hostile towards child rapists. Nearly a decade before the murder, he told prison psychologists he'd been sexually victimized by older males when he was an adolescent; but he denied being a victim on several other occasions. Six years before the murder, he assaulted a cellie for making homosexual advances. The afternoon of the murder, officials forced him to cell with a notorious child rapist who actively engaged in prison sex. A couple of hours before the murder, Tim said the victim made a pass at him, spoke salaciously about how he raped a four year old girl, and described how he had duct-taped her to attic rafters then nailed shut the access panel.
With a combination of trickery and intimidation, Tim cajoled the victim into restraints on the top bunk by saying he wanted to feign an assault to gain a transfer to another prison. Once restrained, Tim told the victim he was going to kill him the way he had tried but failed to kill the little girl. Tim strangled him.
Tim told the police he killed the victim to retaliate against the prison for forcing him to double cell, because of the victim's crime, and because he made a pass.
In mitigation, we played Tim's taped confession to present evidence of how Tim described the victim's conduct in the cell, and to explain how Tim described his reasons for committing the murder. We presented a corrections expert to explain how the prison's double-celling decision violated Ohio policies and national standards. We called two inmates who witnessed Tim protesting the double-celling decision. We presented mental-health evidence from a psychologist who evaluated Tim and his records, and from a Social Worker who treated Tim for several months before the murder. We called the Chairperson of the Ohio Parole Board to testify that, but for Tim's second murder, he almost certainly would have been paroled on his first aggravated murder by the time was near fifty years old, which meant another life sentence would have a punitive impact.
The State's rebuttal worked to Tim's advantage. Their attempt to prove "reasonable compliance" with the double-celling policy sounded like an overly eager cover-up of a bad decision. Their psychiatrist corroborated the serious symptoms of Tim's mental illness despite the fact he disagreed with our expert's diagnosis. And we blocked them from challenging Tim's account of the victim's crimes. They got away with that argument during the first trial by calling Tim a liar whose words about the victim's alleged crimes could not be trusted. This time we stood ready to counter with court documents, police documents, and the testimony of the lead detective. The judge ruled this evidence inadmissible unless the prosecution opened the door by calling Tim a liar again. They kept quiet.
The jurors rejected death and imposed a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Mr. Hancock was represented at trial by OPD counsel Greg Meyers, Bill Mooney, and Rachel Troutman. He won the right to a new mitigation trial through the work of OPD counsel Joe Wilhelm, Kelly Culshaw, Rachel Troutman, Justin Thompson, and former OPD Wendi Dotson.
Inquiries about this case may be directed to Mr. Hancock's trial counsel, Greg Meyers, Bill Mooney, or Rachel Troutman. The Ohio Supreme Court's opinion may be accessed through the following link:
State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 57, 2006-Ohio-106
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-160.pdf
Tim Hancock went to prison in 1990 after pleading guilty to Aggravated Murder, a charge reduced from a capital felony-murder of an elderly woman.
On November 13, 2000, Tim was in the Segregation Unit ("the hole") of the Protective Custody Unit in Warren Correctional Institution. He killed his cellmate nine hours after prison officials forced him to accept a cellie. A year later, a jury convicted him and signed a death verdict predicated on two specifications: prior purposeful murder; murder while in detention.
The judge rejected the death verdict after learning that jurors had trial-phase evidence with them during mitigation-phase deliberations that the judge had ruled off limits. He imposed LWOP. He did not override the death verdict based on an independent weighing of the aggravators against the mitigators.
The prosecutor appealed. The District Appellate Court ruled that the spat over the evidence did not give reason to reject the death verdict, and ordered the trial judge to either accept or reject the death verdict on the merits. The judge imposed death.
Tim appealed. The Ohio Supreme Court affirmed his conviction, but remanded for a new mitigation phase trial to clean up the mess.
Tim became the first person under Ohio's 1981 capital statutes to face a jury seated only to consider whether death was appropriate. His trial began with the jurors being told they were bound to accept the first jury's finding of guilt on Aggravated Murder with two capital specifications. That ended the State's case in chief.
Tim presented mitigation on three fronts: Tim suffered from a serious mental illness that influenced his conduct during the murder, even though it fell short of an insanity defense that the first jury rejected; the prison's hands were dirty for violating their double-celling policy; the victim contributed to the cycle of events that led to murder.
Tim is a an extremely volatile man caught in the grip of a mental illness that causes sweeping mood changes, pathological paranoia, and occasional psychotic symptoms. The defense psychologist labeled it Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar type, and Borderline Personality Disorder. The prosecution's psychiatrist labeled it Borderline Personality Disorder co-existing with strong evidence of malingering by faking auditory and visual hallucinations. Both agreed that Tim's fifteen year history of mental-health treatment in prison painted the picture of a person with significant mental illness.
Tim's prison records depicted a person intolerant of gay men and hostile towards child rapists. Nearly a decade before the murder, he told prison psychologists he'd been sexually victimized by older males when he was an adolescent; but he denied being a victim on several other occasions. Six years before the murder, he assaulted a cellie for making homosexual advances. The afternoon of the murder, officials forced him to cell with a notorious child rapist who actively engaged in prison sex. A couple of hours before the murder, Tim said the victim made a pass at him, spoke salaciously about how he raped a four year old girl, and described how he had duct-taped her to attic rafters then nailed shut the access panel.
With a combination of trickery and intimidation, Tim cajoled the victim into restraints on the top bunk by saying he wanted to feign an assault to gain a transfer to another prison. Once restrained, Tim told the victim he was going to kill him the way he had tried but failed to kill the little girl. Tim strangled him.
Tim told the police he killed the victim to retaliate against the prison for forcing him to double cell, because of the victim's crime, and because he made a pass.
In mitigation, we played Tim's taped confession to present evidence of how Tim described the victim's conduct in the cell, and to explain how Tim described his reasons for committing the murder. We presented a corrections expert to explain how the prison's double-celling decision violated Ohio policies and national standards. We called two inmates who witnessed Tim protesting the double-celling decision. We presented mental-health evidence from a psychologist who evaluated Tim and his records, and from a Social Worker who treated Tim for several months before the murder. We called the Chairperson of the Ohio Parole Board to testify that, but for Tim's second murder, he almost certainly would have been paroled on his first aggravated murder by the time was near fifty years old, which meant another life sentence would have a punitive impact.
The State's rebuttal worked to Tim's advantage. Their attempt to prove "reasonable compliance" with the double-celling policy sounded like an overly eager cover-up of a bad decision. Their psychiatrist corroborated the serious symptoms of Tim's mental illness despite the fact he disagreed with our expert's diagnosis. And we blocked them from challenging Tim's account of the victim's crimes. They got away with that argument during the first trial by calling Tim a liar whose words about the victim's alleged crimes could not be trusted. This time we stood ready to counter with court documents, police documents, and the testimony of the lead detective. The judge ruled this evidence inadmissible unless the prosecution opened the door by calling Tim a liar again. They kept quiet.
The jurors rejected death and imposed a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Mr. Hancock was represented at trial by OPD counsel Greg Meyers, Bill Mooney, and Rachel Troutman. He won the right to a new mitigation trial through the work of OPD counsel Joe Wilhelm, Kelly Culshaw, Rachel Troutman, Justin Thompson, and former OPD Wendi Dotson.
Inquiries about this case may be directed to Mr. Hancock's trial counsel, Greg Meyers, Bill Mooney, or Rachel Troutman. The Ohio Supreme Court's opinion may be accessed through the following link:
State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 57, 2006-Ohio-106
http://www.sconet.state.oh.us/rod/newpdf/0/2006/2006-ohio-160.pdf
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Timothy Hancock #219467
Man C I Inf 13
PO Box 788
Mansfield
Ohio 44901
USA
Dear Friends and Supporters
As you know I won a mitigation trial and was given life without parole! Actually 888 years and 88 days to be precise.
I am still not abandoing my appeals for a complete new trial!! Not until justice is served for all and the corruption of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation is exposed.
I want to thank each and everyone who helped, wrote and supported me, a special thanks to Karen, a first class lass she is!! Also to "Harley" Diane and Amnesty International, My neice Jamie and to you all. Linda Colburn, God Bless. Lynne C, write now (smile)
To each and to all of you God Bless and much love.
There is a lot more fight ahead, not only for me, but for the many many wrongfully convicted people. Remember if not for a lot of you, many will be executed.
Its not always how big the fight is, but how much fight we have in us.
Please do write to me and let me know how you all are.
Thanks and God Bless
Tim.
Man C I Inf 13
PO Box 788
Mansfield
Ohio 44901
USA
Dear Friends and Supporters
As you know I won a mitigation trial and was given life without parole! Actually 888 years and 88 days to be precise.
I am still not abandoing my appeals for a complete new trial!! Not until justice is served for all and the corruption of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation is exposed.
I want to thank each and everyone who helped, wrote and supported me, a special thanks to Karen, a first class lass she is!! Also to "Harley" Diane and Amnesty International, My neice Jamie and to you all. Linda Colburn, God Bless. Lynne C, write now (smile)
To each and to all of you God Bless and much love.
There is a lot more fight ahead, not only for me, but for the many many wrongfully convicted people. Remember if not for a lot of you, many will be executed.
Its not always how big the fight is, but how much fight we have in us.
Please do write to me and let me know how you all are.
Thanks and God Bless
Tim.
Wednesday, March 07, 2007
Tim back at Mansfield
You can write to Tim at the address below
Timothy L Hancock A219467
Man C I
PO Box 788
Mansfield
Ohio 44901 USA
Email messages can be sent to timothylhancock@yahoo.com
Tim has no access to a computer so any emails will be passed onto him.If you wish a reply by snail mail please add your postal address.Thank you.
Timothy L Hancock A219467
Man C I
PO Box 788
Mansfield
Ohio 44901 USA
Email messages can be sent to timothylhancock@yahoo.com
Tim has no access to a computer so any emails will be passed onto him.If you wish a reply by snail mail please add your postal address.Thank you.
Once sentenced to death, killer now faces life in prison
Once sentenced to death, killer now faces life in prison
By Tiffany Y. Latta
Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
LEBANON — A man who once sentenced to die for killing a convicted child rapist will now serve life in prison without the possibility of parole.
After deliberating for five hours, a Warren County jury on Monday night recommended Judge James L. Flannery sentence Timothy L. Hancock, 37, to spend the rest of his life in prison strangling his cellmate Jason Wagoner, a convicted child sex offender.
The jury of eight women and four men could have recommended death, life with the possibility of parole after 25 years or life with the possibility of parole after 30 years.
A different jury recommended in 2001 that Warren County Common Pleas Court Judge Neal Bronson sentence Hancock to death for the murder of Wagner, 25, of Lancaster who was serving 44 years to life for kidnapping and the attempted murder of a 3-year-old Lancaster girl.
But Bronson sentenced Hancock to life in prison after learning jurors wrongly received exhibits — an audiotaped confession and photos — during the sentencing phase.
Bronson later sentenced Hancock to death after the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals ruled in 2003 that Bronson erred in ignoring the jury's recommendation. However, four Ohio Supreme Court justices ruled in February 2006 that the jury's recommendation of death was invalid and ordered that Hancock get a new sentencing hearing for the crime.
During closing arguments Monday, prosecutors urged jurors to sentence Hancock to death.
Prosecutors told jurors they need not consider Hancock's claims of mental illness, but listen to Hancock's own words as to why he killed Wagner seven years ago.
Hancock was recorded saying he killed Wagner not to avenge the crimes Wagner committed the 3-year-old girl, but instead to teach prison officials a lesson for putting someone in his single cell.
"... I more or less used her as a crutch to just let my anger just (expletive) fly. Because in my mind I'm thinking I bet they won't put anybody else in here...,'' Hancock said.
Hancock's attorney, however, asked jurors to sentence Hancock to life without parole.
Greg Meyers, chief counsel for the Ohio Public Defender, told jurors that Hancock is a sick man who has serious mental problems.
Meyers also blamed the murder in part on Warren County Correctional Institution guards failed to follow protocol before placing Wagner in Hancock's cell.
Meyers said Wagner was placed in Hancock's cell at the state prison on Ohio 63 east in Turtlecreek Twp. despite reports that Hancock was a victim of sexual abuse as a child, hates sex offenders and objected to Wagner being placed in his cell.
He said while Hancock, who is already serving life for a 1989 murder, deserves to be punished for killing Wagner, he doesn't deserve to die.
"There are options. You don't have to kill him,'' Meyers said.
Contact this reporter at (513) 696-4542 or tlatta@coxohio.com.
By Tiffany Y. Latta
Staff Writer
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
LEBANON — A man who once sentenced to die for killing a convicted child rapist will now serve life in prison without the possibility of parole.
After deliberating for five hours, a Warren County jury on Monday night recommended Judge James L. Flannery sentence Timothy L. Hancock, 37, to spend the rest of his life in prison strangling his cellmate Jason Wagoner, a convicted child sex offender.
The jury of eight women and four men could have recommended death, life with the possibility of parole after 25 years or life with the possibility of parole after 30 years.
A different jury recommended in 2001 that Warren County Common Pleas Court Judge Neal Bronson sentence Hancock to death for the murder of Wagner, 25, of Lancaster who was serving 44 years to life for kidnapping and the attempted murder of a 3-year-old Lancaster girl.
But Bronson sentenced Hancock to life in prison after learning jurors wrongly received exhibits — an audiotaped confession and photos — during the sentencing phase.
Bronson later sentenced Hancock to death after the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals ruled in 2003 that Bronson erred in ignoring the jury's recommendation. However, four Ohio Supreme Court justices ruled in February 2006 that the jury's recommendation of death was invalid and ordered that Hancock get a new sentencing hearing for the crime.
During closing arguments Monday, prosecutors urged jurors to sentence Hancock to death.
Prosecutors told jurors they need not consider Hancock's claims of mental illness, but listen to Hancock's own words as to why he killed Wagner seven years ago.
Hancock was recorded saying he killed Wagner not to avenge the crimes Wagner committed the 3-year-old girl, but instead to teach prison officials a lesson for putting someone in his single cell.
"... I more or less used her as a crutch to just let my anger just (expletive) fly. Because in my mind I'm thinking I bet they won't put anybody else in here...,'' Hancock said.
Hancock's attorney, however, asked jurors to sentence Hancock to life without parole.
Greg Meyers, chief counsel for the Ohio Public Defender, told jurors that Hancock is a sick man who has serious mental problems.
Meyers also blamed the murder in part on Warren County Correctional Institution guards failed to follow protocol before placing Wagner in Hancock's cell.
Meyers said Wagner was placed in Hancock's cell at the state prison on Ohio 63 east in Turtlecreek Twp. despite reports that Hancock was a victim of sexual abuse as a child, hates sex offenders and objected to Wagner being placed in his cell.
He said while Hancock, who is already serving life for a 1989 murder, deserves to be punished for killing Wagner, he doesn't deserve to die.
"There are options. You don't have to kill him,'' Meyers said.
Contact this reporter at (513) 696-4542 or tlatta@coxohio.com.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Jury considers death penalty case
Jury considers death penalty case
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON – A jury has begun deliberations in an unusual death-penalty case here.
Judge James Flannery sent the case of Timothy Hancock to a Warren County Common Pleas Court jury around 3:20 p.m. today.
In 2001, a different jury found Hancock guilty in the 2000 strangulation of his cellmate, Jason Wagner, at Warren Correctional Institution in Turtlecreek Township.
The original jury’s recommendation of a death sentence was overturned, and a series of appeals stopped short of granting Hancock a new trial.
In what could be Ohio’s first case of its kind, the state Supreme Court said Hancock’s aggravated murder conviction should stand, but a new jury should consider what sentence to recommend for Hancock. There are four possible choices: death, life without parole, life with parole eligibility after 30 years or life with parole eligibility after 25 years.Although Warren County prosecutors argue that the heinousness of the slaying and other factors call for the death penalty, lawyers from the Ohio Public Defender’s Office presented evidence attempting to persuade the jury to spare Hancock’s life.Hancock, 37, is already serving a life sentence for the 1989 robbery and slaying of an elderly woman in Allen County, where he previously lived.
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON – A jury has begun deliberations in an unusual death-penalty case here.
Judge James Flannery sent the case of Timothy Hancock to a Warren County Common Pleas Court jury around 3:20 p.m. today.
In 2001, a different jury found Hancock guilty in the 2000 strangulation of his cellmate, Jason Wagner, at Warren Correctional Institution in Turtlecreek Township.
The original jury’s recommendation of a death sentence was overturned, and a series of appeals stopped short of granting Hancock a new trial.
In what could be Ohio’s first case of its kind, the state Supreme Court said Hancock’s aggravated murder conviction should stand, but a new jury should consider what sentence to recommend for Hancock. There are four possible choices: death, life without parole, life with parole eligibility after 30 years or life with parole eligibility after 25 years.Although Warren County prosecutors argue that the heinousness of the slaying and other factors call for the death penalty, lawyers from the Ohio Public Defender’s Office presented evidence attempting to persuade the jury to spare Hancock’s life.Hancock, 37, is already serving a life sentence for the 1989 robbery and slaying of an elderly woman in Allen County, where he previously lived.
Jury again decides convicted prison killer's fate
Jury again decides convicted prison killer's fate
Staff Writer
Monday, February 26, 2007
LEBANON — A Warren County jury is considering whether a man convicted of killing his cellmate in a state prison should be sentenced to die.
Jurors began deliberating at 3 p.m. Monday after hearing five days of testimony about the events that led Timothy L. Hancock, 37, to kill child sex offender Jason Wagner.
The jury of eight women and four men can sentence Hancock to death, serve life with the possibility of parole after 25 years, life with the possibility of parole after 30 years or life with without the possibility of parole.
A different jury recommended in 2001 that Warren County Common Pleas Court Judge Neal Bronson sentence Hancock to death for the murder of Wagner, 25, of Lancaster who was serving 44 years to life for kidnapping and the attempted murder of a 3-year-old Lancaster girl.
But Bronson sentenced Hancock to life in prison after learning jurors wrongly received exhibits — an audiotaped confession and photos — during the sentencing phase.
Bronson later sentenced Hancock to death after the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals ruled in 2003 that Bronson erred in ignoring the jury's recommendation. However, four Ohio Supreme Court justices ruled in February 2006 that the jury's recommendation of death was invalid and ordered that Hancock get a new sentencing hearing for the crime.
During closing arguments Monday, prosecutors urged jurors to sentence Hancock to death.
Prosecutors told jurors they need not consider Hancock's claims of mental illness, but listen to Hancock's own words as to why he killed Wagner seven years ago.
Hancock was recorded saying he killed Wagner not to avenge the crimes Wagner committed the 3-year-old girl, but instead to teach prison officials a lesson for putting someone in his single cell.
"... I more or less used her as a crutch to just let my anger just (expletive) fly. Because in my mind I'm thinking I bet they won't put anybody else in here...,'' Hancock said.
Hancock's attorney, however, asked jurors to sentence Hancock to life without parole
Greg Meyers, chief counsel for the Ohio Public Defender, told jurors that Hancock is a sick man who has serious mental problems.
Meyers also blamed the murder in part on Warren County Correctional Institution guards failed to follow protocol before placing Wagner in Hancock's cell.
Meyers said Wagner was placed in Hancock's cell at the state prison on Ohio 63 east in Turtlecreek Twp. despite reports that Hancock was a victim of sexual abuse as a child, hates sex offenders and objected to Wagner being placed in his cell.
He said while Hancock, who is already serving life for a 1989 murder, deserves to be punished for killing Wagner, he doesn't deserve to die.
"There are options. You don't have to kill him,'' Meyers said.
Contact this reporter at (513) 696-4542 or tlatta@coxohio.com.
Staff Writer
Monday, February 26, 2007
LEBANON — A Warren County jury is considering whether a man convicted of killing his cellmate in a state prison should be sentenced to die.
Jurors began deliberating at 3 p.m. Monday after hearing five days of testimony about the events that led Timothy L. Hancock, 37, to kill child sex offender Jason Wagner.
The jury of eight women and four men can sentence Hancock to death, serve life with the possibility of parole after 25 years, life with the possibility of parole after 30 years or life with without the possibility of parole.
A different jury recommended in 2001 that Warren County Common Pleas Court Judge Neal Bronson sentence Hancock to death for the murder of Wagner, 25, of Lancaster who was serving 44 years to life for kidnapping and the attempted murder of a 3-year-old Lancaster girl.
But Bronson sentenced Hancock to life in prison after learning jurors wrongly received exhibits — an audiotaped confession and photos — during the sentencing phase.
Bronson later sentenced Hancock to death after the Ohio 12th District Court of Appeals ruled in 2003 that Bronson erred in ignoring the jury's recommendation. However, four Ohio Supreme Court justices ruled in February 2006 that the jury's recommendation of death was invalid and ordered that Hancock get a new sentencing hearing for the crime.
During closing arguments Monday, prosecutors urged jurors to sentence Hancock to death.
Prosecutors told jurors they need not consider Hancock's claims of mental illness, but listen to Hancock's own words as to why he killed Wagner seven years ago.
Hancock was recorded saying he killed Wagner not to avenge the crimes Wagner committed the 3-year-old girl, but instead to teach prison officials a lesson for putting someone in his single cell.
"... I more or less used her as a crutch to just let my anger just (expletive) fly. Because in my mind I'm thinking I bet they won't put anybody else in here...,'' Hancock said.
Hancock's attorney, however, asked jurors to sentence Hancock to life without parole
Greg Meyers, chief counsel for the Ohio Public Defender, told jurors that Hancock is a sick man who has serious mental problems.
Meyers also blamed the murder in part on Warren County Correctional Institution guards failed to follow protocol before placing Wagner in Hancock's cell.
Meyers said Wagner was placed in Hancock's cell at the state prison on Ohio 63 east in Turtlecreek Twp. despite reports that Hancock was a victim of sexual abuse as a child, hates sex offenders and objected to Wagner being placed in his cell.
He said while Hancock, who is already serving life for a 1989 murder, deserves to be punished for killing Wagner, he doesn't deserve to die.
"There are options. You don't have to kill him,'' Meyers said.
Contact this reporter at (513) 696-4542 or tlatta@coxohio.com.
Saturday, February 24, 2007
Send Tim a card of support
Please take time to send Tim a card of support and encouragement
Timothy L Hancock A219467
Lebanon Correctional Institution (LeCI)
P. O. Box 56
Lebanon,
Ohio 45036
Email messages can be sent to timothylhancock@yahoo.com
Tim has no access to a computer so any emails will be passed onto him.
If you wish a reply by snail mail please add your postal address.
Thank you.
Timothy L Hancock A219467
Lebanon Correctional Institution (LeCI)
P. O. Box 56
Lebanon,
Ohio 45036
Email messages can be sent to timothylhancock@yahoo.com
Tim has no access to a computer so any emails will be passed onto him.
If you wish a reply by snail mail please add your postal address.
Thank you.
Friday, February 23, 2007
Expert: Pervert, killer were inapt cellmates
Expert: Pervert, killer were inapt cellmates
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON - Prison officials helped set the stage for murder by housing Timothy Hancock, a convicted killer who hated sex offenders, in a cell with child rapist Jason Wagner, an expert witness told a Warren County jury Thursday.
In the first Ohio case of its kind, the jury will consider whether to reinstate a previous jury's recommendation of a death sentence for Hancock. The 37-year-old Allen County man was granted a new "penalty phase," but not a new trial, after a series of appeals of his 2001 conviction and death sentence in Wagner's strangulation.
The killing happened in 2000 at Warren Correctional Institution, a state-run prison in Turtlecreek Township.
Testimony and closing arguments could wrap up Monday, followed by jury deliberations. The jury will be asked to choose among four sentences: death, life with no parole, life with possibility of parole after 30 years and life with possibility of parole after 25 years. Hancock is serving a life sentence for the 1989 robbery and slaying of an elderly woman in Allen County.
Although Warren County prosecutors argue that the heinousness of the slaying and other factors call for the death penalty, lawyers from the Ohio Public Defender's Office are presenting evidence attempting to persuade the jury to spare Hancock's life.
Testifying for the defense, Steve J. Martin, a Texas corrections consultant, told the jury that Warren Correctional Institution officials violated state and local policies when they failed to properly collect and assess information about the character of Hancock and Wagner before putting them together in 2000.
There were factors "compelling that these two particular inmates be housed in different cells," Martin said.
As a convicted child rapist, Wagner was despised by other inmates, Martin said. Wagner also had a history of mental illness and mild mental retardation, and openly talked about his crime, making him more vulnerable to attack. Records describe him as small in stature and weak, Martin said.
"In his case, any one of those factors could have been ... enough to keep him by himself," Martin said.
Hancock had a documented chronic history of mental illnesses, violence, and dislike of sex offenders. He also objected to sharing a cell with Wagner, Martin said.
Because of both inmates' histories, "There was a failure to manage what is an obvious and known risk. ... them coming together in a cell," Martin said.
Josh Engel, Warren County assistant prosecutor, attacked Martin's credibility, noting he lacked knowledge of Ohio prison statistics that would have a bearing on how often inmates are put into cells in pairs.
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON - Prison officials helped set the stage for murder by housing Timothy Hancock, a convicted killer who hated sex offenders, in a cell with child rapist Jason Wagner, an expert witness told a Warren County jury Thursday.
In the first Ohio case of its kind, the jury will consider whether to reinstate a previous jury's recommendation of a death sentence for Hancock. The 37-year-old Allen County man was granted a new "penalty phase," but not a new trial, after a series of appeals of his 2001 conviction and death sentence in Wagner's strangulation.
The killing happened in 2000 at Warren Correctional Institution, a state-run prison in Turtlecreek Township.
Testimony and closing arguments could wrap up Monday, followed by jury deliberations. The jury will be asked to choose among four sentences: death, life with no parole, life with possibility of parole after 30 years and life with possibility of parole after 25 years. Hancock is serving a life sentence for the 1989 robbery and slaying of an elderly woman in Allen County.
Although Warren County prosecutors argue that the heinousness of the slaying and other factors call for the death penalty, lawyers from the Ohio Public Defender's Office are presenting evidence attempting to persuade the jury to spare Hancock's life.
Testifying for the defense, Steve J. Martin, a Texas corrections consultant, told the jury that Warren Correctional Institution officials violated state and local policies when they failed to properly collect and assess information about the character of Hancock and Wagner before putting them together in 2000.
There were factors "compelling that these two particular inmates be housed in different cells," Martin said.
As a convicted child rapist, Wagner was despised by other inmates, Martin said. Wagner also had a history of mental illness and mild mental retardation, and openly talked about his crime, making him more vulnerable to attack. Records describe him as small in stature and weak, Martin said.
"In his case, any one of those factors could have been ... enough to keep him by himself," Martin said.
Hancock had a documented chronic history of mental illnesses, violence, and dislike of sex offenders. He also objected to sharing a cell with Wagner, Martin said.
Because of both inmates' histories, "There was a failure to manage what is an obvious and known risk. ... them coming together in a cell," Martin said.
Josh Engel, Warren County assistant prosecutor, attacked Martin's credibility, noting he lacked knowledge of Ohio prison statistics that would have a bearing on how often inmates are put into cells in pairs.
Killer's claim: prison made errors
Killer's claim: prison made errors
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON -- Prison officials helped set the stage for murder by housing Timothy Hancock, a convicted killer who hated sex offenders, in a cell with child rapist Jason Wagner, an expert witness told a Warren County jury this morning.
In the first Ohio case of its kind, the jury is considering whether to reinstate a previous jury's recommendation of a death sentence for Hancock. The 37-year-old Allen County man was granted a new "penalty phase," but not a new trial, after a series of appeals. The jury was seated Wednesday; officials expect testimony and closing arguments to wrap up on Monday.
Although Warren County assistant prosecutors argue that the heinousness of the slaying and other factors call for the death penalty, lawyers from the Ohio Public Defender's Office are presenting evidence attempting to persuade the jury to spare Hancock's life.
Testifying for the defense, Steve J. Martin, a Texas corrections consultant, told the jury today that Warren Correctional Institution officials violated state and local policies when they failed to properly collect and assess information about the character of Hancock and Wagner before they put the inmates together in 2000.There were factors “compelling that these two particuclar inmates be housed in different cells," Martin said. As a convicted child rapist, Wagner was despised among other inmates, Martin said.Wagner also had a history of mental illness and mild mental retardation, and openly talked about his crime, making him more vulnerable to attack. Further, records describe him as small in stature and "weak," Martin said. "In his case, any one of those factors could have been...enough to keep him by himself," Martin said. Hancock had a documented chronic history of mental illnesses, violence, and expressed dislike of sex offenders. He also objected to sharing a cell with Wagner, Martin said. Because of both inmates' histories, "There was a failure to manage what is an obvious and known risk...Them coming together in a cell," Martin said.Josh Engel, Warren County assistant prosecutor, attacked Martin's credibility, noting he lacked specific knowledge of Ohio prison statistics that would have a bearing on how often inmates are put into cells in pairs and how many are in prison for crimes against other people.
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON -- Prison officials helped set the stage for murder by housing Timothy Hancock, a convicted killer who hated sex offenders, in a cell with child rapist Jason Wagner, an expert witness told a Warren County jury this morning.
In the first Ohio case of its kind, the jury is considering whether to reinstate a previous jury's recommendation of a death sentence for Hancock. The 37-year-old Allen County man was granted a new "penalty phase," but not a new trial, after a series of appeals. The jury was seated Wednesday; officials expect testimony and closing arguments to wrap up on Monday.
Although Warren County assistant prosecutors argue that the heinousness of the slaying and other factors call for the death penalty, lawyers from the Ohio Public Defender's Office are presenting evidence attempting to persuade the jury to spare Hancock's life.
Testifying for the defense, Steve J. Martin, a Texas corrections consultant, told the jury today that Warren Correctional Institution officials violated state and local policies when they failed to properly collect and assess information about the character of Hancock and Wagner before they put the inmates together in 2000.There were factors “compelling that these two particuclar inmates be housed in different cells," Martin said. As a convicted child rapist, Wagner was despised among other inmates, Martin said.Wagner also had a history of mental illness and mild mental retardation, and openly talked about his crime, making him more vulnerable to attack. Further, records describe him as small in stature and "weak," Martin said. "In his case, any one of those factors could have been...enough to keep him by himself," Martin said. Hancock had a documented chronic history of mental illnesses, violence, and expressed dislike of sex offenders. He also objected to sharing a cell with Wagner, Martin said. Because of both inmates' histories, "There was a failure to manage what is an obvious and known risk...Them coming together in a cell," Martin said.Josh Engel, Warren County assistant prosecutor, attacked Martin's credibility, noting he lacked specific knowledge of Ohio prison statistics that would have a bearing on how often inmates are put into cells in pairs and how many are in prison for crimes against other people.
5 years after conviction, man still could face death penalty
5 years after conviction, man still could face death penalty
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON - In a case believed to be the first of its kind in Ohio, a Warren County jury will consider whether a convicted killer should get the death penalty even though a different jury heard his case more than five years ago.
A jury began hearing evidence Wednesday in the strange case of Timothy Hancock, which has been bouncing among various courts since a jury convicted him of strangling his prison cellmate in late 2001.
"We've never done this before," Warren County Prosecutor Rachel Hutzel said. "The jury that decided guilt will not be the jury that decides whether he gets death."
Hutzel said she is unaware of any other Ohio cases involving those peculiar circumstances.
Testimony is expected to resume today in Warren County Common Pleas Court in Lebanon. Judge James Flannery is presiding.
A series of higher court decisions stopped short of granting Hancock a new trial but granted him a new "penalty phase," Hutzel said.
After a defendant is convicted in a death-penalty trial, jurors weigh the seriousness of the crime against psychological or other factors, then recommend a sentence to a judge - life with parole eligibility, life with no possibility of parole, or execution.
A former Allen County resident, Hancock, 37, was already serving a life prison term for a 1989 slaying when he killed child rapist Jason Wagner in 2000 at Warren Correctional Institution, a state prison in Turtlecreek Township.
A jury convicted Hancock in Wagner's death and recommended a death sentence. Judge Neal Bronson rejected that sentence because a bailiff mistakenly allowed jurors to see potentially inflammatory evidence.
Bronson imposed a sentence of life without possibility of parole but changed that sentence to death in 2003 after a Middletown appeals court ruled that the jurors should have been allowed to see the death photos of Wagner as they considered the death penalty.
Ultimately, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Hancock was entitled to a new penalty phase of his trial, Hutzel said.
BY JANICE MORSE JMORSE@ENQUIRER.COM
LEBANON - In a case believed to be the first of its kind in Ohio, a Warren County jury will consider whether a convicted killer should get the death penalty even though a different jury heard his case more than five years ago.
A jury began hearing evidence Wednesday in the strange case of Timothy Hancock, which has been bouncing among various courts since a jury convicted him of strangling his prison cellmate in late 2001.
"We've never done this before," Warren County Prosecutor Rachel Hutzel said. "The jury that decided guilt will not be the jury that decides whether he gets death."
Hutzel said she is unaware of any other Ohio cases involving those peculiar circumstances.
Testimony is expected to resume today in Warren County Common Pleas Court in Lebanon. Judge James Flannery is presiding.
A series of higher court decisions stopped short of granting Hancock a new trial but granted him a new "penalty phase," Hutzel said.
After a defendant is convicted in a death-penalty trial, jurors weigh the seriousness of the crime against psychological or other factors, then recommend a sentence to a judge - life with parole eligibility, life with no possibility of parole, or execution.
A former Allen County resident, Hancock, 37, was already serving a life prison term for a 1989 slaying when he killed child rapist Jason Wagner in 2000 at Warren Correctional Institution, a state prison in Turtlecreek Township.
A jury convicted Hancock in Wagner's death and recommended a death sentence. Judge Neal Bronson rejected that sentence because a bailiff mistakenly allowed jurors to see potentially inflammatory evidence.
Bronson imposed a sentence of life without possibility of parole but changed that sentence to death in 2003 after a Middletown appeals court ruled that the jurors should have been allowed to see the death photos of Wagner as they considered the death penalty.
Ultimately, the Ohio Supreme Court ruled that Hancock was entitled to a new penalty phase of his trial, Hutzel said.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
Support needed in court
I am going back to trial begining 20th Feb in Lebanon Ohio.
The Court is The Warren County Court of Common Pleas.500 JUSTICE DRIVE, LEBANON OHIO 45036TELEPHONE (513) 695-1000/422-9191/425-1000/925-1000/783-4993
Times and dates of the trial.
02-20-2007 022007 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL 02-21-2007 022107 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL 02-22-2007 022207 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL 02-23-2007 022307 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL
In case I do recieve the death sentence again, I want to challenge those of you who may have doubt of the injustice to come and watch. Listen and see for yourself and then Judge the truth. It's only by caring people and by someone who has no voice, can truly be heard!!
I NEED people to come and support me in that court in February. Please try to be there.
Tim
http://torley.org/Tim-Hancock/Tim-Hancock/
Timothy Hancock 219 467Man C I, DR 3PO Box 788MansfieldOhio 44901 USA
The Court is The Warren County Court of Common Pleas.500 JUSTICE DRIVE, LEBANON OHIO 45036TELEPHONE (513) 695-1000/422-9191/425-1000/925-1000/783-4993
Times and dates of the trial.
02-20-2007 022007 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL 02-21-2007 022107 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL 02-22-2007 022207 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL 02-23-2007 022307 09:00 AM FOUR DAY JURY TRIAL
In case I do recieve the death sentence again, I want to challenge those of you who may have doubt of the injustice to come and watch. Listen and see for yourself and then Judge the truth. It's only by caring people and by someone who has no voice, can truly be heard!!
I NEED people to come and support me in that court in February. Please try to be there.
Tim
http://torley.org/Tim-Hancock/Tim-Hancock/
Timothy Hancock 219 467Man C I, DR 3PO Box 788MansfieldOhio 44901 USA
Tuesday, January 09, 2007
Letter from Tim
Timothy Hancock 219 467
Man C I, DR 3
PO Box 788
Mansfield
Ohio 44901 USA
Letter Written 2 January 07
Dear Friends and Supporters
Thank you for the many birthday and Christmas cards I recieved. It truly lifted my spirits and although I can't respond to them all I want you to know how much you are appreciated.
I want to thank Karen Torley for her support, if not for her, I doubt my story would be out there! Much love to you Karen.
I plan on sending out more information and some better pictures of me. I want to put a face to the injustice I have faced and also to the man who paid with his life for the corruption of the State of Ohio.
Karen, my trial is February 20th at Warren County in Lebanon Ohio. I need you to burn that computer up and come through for me. I have no one but you to help me.
Try Maria Durant, ABC 6/Fox 28 Columbus or Tim Taylor 19 Action news in Cleveland. Send them all the info on my case please.
I need people to help get media to that court room.
You may think that, "Well if I write on Tim's behalf, I am only one voice"
That is a misconception!! Every single letter soon add's up to a huge protest.
I am going back to trial on 20th Feb in Lebanon Ohio. In case I do recieve the death sentence again, I want to challenge those of you who may have doubt of the injustice to come and watch. Listen and see for yourself and then Judge the truth. It's only by caring people and by someone who has no voice, can truly be heard!!
I NEED people to support me in that court in February. Please try to be there.
You could help by flooding the media I mentioned above in Ohio asking them to do an Investigative Report and by sending emails of protest to Mr Andy Sievers Ass County Prosecutor of Warren County Ohio and let him know you know how bad my case went.
Details of my case are on http://torley.org/Tim-Hancock/Tim-Hancock/The-Tim-Hancock-and-Jason-Wagner-Story.-731-73.html
Thanks to Linda Colburn- "Harley", also Lynn Cameron, if you read this please write me! Thanks to everyone who has written me. I can't name them all. (smile) Thank you!
Again to Karen, who has had an up and down 2006, Karen you are my angel. I can honestly say that if not for you, I would have ended my life long ago.
To any of you single women out there who dares to write a Yank, please do. My life is void,, my heart is hard but my love is strong. (smile)
Again to one and all. Let's raise our voices as one and unite in a cause to fight for Justice and against a corrupt government.
Happy New Year
And God Bless
Tim Hancock
www.torley.org has info on my case
Man C I, DR 3
PO Box 788
Mansfield
Ohio 44901 USA
Letter Written 2 January 07
Dear Friends and Supporters
Thank you for the many birthday and Christmas cards I recieved. It truly lifted my spirits and although I can't respond to them all I want you to know how much you are appreciated.
I want to thank Karen Torley for her support, if not for her, I doubt my story would be out there! Much love to you Karen.
I plan on sending out more information and some better pictures of me. I want to put a face to the injustice I have faced and also to the man who paid with his life for the corruption of the State of Ohio.
Karen, my trial is February 20th at Warren County in Lebanon Ohio. I need you to burn that computer up and come through for me. I have no one but you to help me.
Try Maria Durant, ABC 6/Fox 28 Columbus or Tim Taylor 19 Action news in Cleveland. Send them all the info on my case please.
I need people to help get media to that court room.
You may think that, "Well if I write on Tim's behalf, I am only one voice"
That is a misconception!! Every single letter soon add's up to a huge protest.
I am going back to trial on 20th Feb in Lebanon Ohio. In case I do recieve the death sentence again, I want to challenge those of you who may have doubt of the injustice to come and watch. Listen and see for yourself and then Judge the truth. It's only by caring people and by someone who has no voice, can truly be heard!!
I NEED people to support me in that court in February. Please try to be there.
You could help by flooding the media I mentioned above in Ohio asking them to do an Investigative Report and by sending emails of protest to Mr Andy Sievers Ass County Prosecutor of Warren County Ohio and let him know you know how bad my case went.
Details of my case are on http://torley.org/Tim-Hancock/Tim-Hancock/The-Tim-Hancock-and-Jason-Wagner-Story.-731-73.html
Thanks to Linda Colburn- "Harley", also Lynn Cameron, if you read this please write me! Thanks to everyone who has written me. I can't name them all. (smile) Thank you!
Again to Karen, who has had an up and down 2006, Karen you are my angel. I can honestly say that if not for you, I would have ended my life long ago.
To any of you single women out there who dares to write a Yank, please do. My life is void,, my heart is hard but my love is strong. (smile)
Again to one and all. Let's raise our voices as one and unite in a cause to fight for Justice and against a corrupt government.
Happy New Year
And God Bless
Tim Hancock
www.torley.org has info on my case
Saturday, June 03, 2006
Timothy Hancock: Granted a new sentencing hearing
Timothy Hancock: Granted a new sentencing hearing
Death row inmate Timothy Hancock will receive a new sentencing hearing. Mr. Hancock’s death sentence was vacated by the Ohio Supreme Court on Feb. 1, 2006.
After exhibits excluded from Mr. Hancock’s sentencing hearing improperly went to the jury during its sentencing deliberations, the trial court declared a mistrial and imposed a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. The State of Ohio appealed. The Court of Appeals, after finding that the trial court had abused its discretion, vacated Mr. Hancock’s life sentence and remanded his case to the trial court to re-weigh the aggravating circumstances and mitigating factors. On remand, the trial court imposed a death sentence.
On this appeal before the Ohio Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals’ decision was reversed. The Ohio Supreme Court found that the trial court had not abused its discretion in declaring a mistrial, and ordered that Mr. Hancock’s case be remanded for a new sentencing hearing.
Inquiries about this case may be directed to Mr. Hancock’s counsel, Joseph Wilhelm and Kelly Culshaw. The Ohio Supreme Court’s opinion may be accessed through the following link:
State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 57, 2006-Ohio-106
Death row inmate Timothy Hancock will receive a new sentencing hearing. Mr. Hancock’s death sentence was vacated by the Ohio Supreme Court on Feb. 1, 2006.
After exhibits excluded from Mr. Hancock’s sentencing hearing improperly went to the jury during its sentencing deliberations, the trial court declared a mistrial and imposed a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. The State of Ohio appealed. The Court of Appeals, after finding that the trial court had abused its discretion, vacated Mr. Hancock’s life sentence and remanded his case to the trial court to re-weigh the aggravating circumstances and mitigating factors. On remand, the trial court imposed a death sentence.
On this appeal before the Ohio Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals’ decision was reversed. The Ohio Supreme Court found that the trial court had not abused its discretion in declaring a mistrial, and ordered that Mr. Hancock’s case be remanded for a new sentencing hearing.
Inquiries about this case may be directed to Mr. Hancock’s counsel, Joseph Wilhelm and Kelly Culshaw. The Ohio Supreme Court’s opinion may be accessed through the following link:
State v. Hancock, 108 Ohio St.3d 57, 2006-Ohio-106
Tuesday, February 14, 2006
Wednesday, February 01, 2006
state v. hancock, case no. 2003-2099
MEDIA RELEASE
DECISION SUMMARIES
Wednesday, Feb. 1, 2006
Court Affirms Conviction for Lebanon Prison
Murder, Orders New Sentencing Process
state v. hancock, case no. 2003-2099
12th district court of appeals (warren county)
COLUMBUS – The Supreme Court of Ohio today unanimously affirmed the aggravated murder conviction of Timothy Hancock for the November 2000 strangulation killing of Jason Wagner while Wagner was Hancock’s cellmate at the Warren Correctional Institution in Lebanon. In reviewing the trial court’s sentencing process, however, the Court held 4-3 that because the jury inadvertently reviewed evidence the trial judge had ordered excluded from the penalty phase of the trial, the jury’s recommendation of a death sentence was invalid. Based on that finding, the case was remanded to the Warren County Common Pleas court for a new sentencing hearing.
Hancock, who was serving a term at the Lebanon prison facility for a prior aggravated murder conviction, tricked Wagner into letting Hancock tie his arms and legs to a bed frame, and then strangled Wagner to death using a rolled-up and knotted bed sheet. When guards discovered the crime, Hancock said he killed Wagner because Wagner had bragged about molesting a child.
At trial, a jury found Hancock guilty of aggravated murder with one death penalty specification, the trial court, after conducting a bench trial, found Hancock guilty of a second death specification. At the start of the penalty phase, the judge ruled that in considering whether to recommend a death sentence or an alternative term of life imprisonment, jurors should not be provided with several items of evidence they had been permitted to review during the guilt phase of the trial. Excluded items included Hancock’s statement to investigators, photos of the crime scene and the actual bed-sheet ligature he had used to strangle the victim. The jury retired to deliberate and subsequently returned a death penalty recommendation.
After the jury had reported its verdict, however, the judge discovered that the statement and other items of evidence he had ordered to be excluded from the penalty phase had inadvertently been sent to the jury room, and had been considered by jurors in arriving at their death penalty recommendation. Finding that this error could not be undone and was “presumptively prejudicial” to Hancock, the judge declared the penalty phase of the case a mistrial, and ruled that under the circumstances he must disregard the jury’s death penalty recommendation. Without conducting his own independent weighing of aggravating and mitigating factors in the case, the judge proceeded to impose a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The state appealed to the 12th District Court of Appeals, which ruled that the contested evidence viewed by jurors was admissible in the penalty phase of the trial, and held that the trial court had abused its discretion in declaring a mistrial based on the jury’s exposure to that material. The Court of Appeals reinstated the jury’s recommendation of a death sentence, and remanded the case to the trial judge for his independent weighing of the aggravating and mitigating factors as required by the state’s capital sentencing statute. After conducting that weighing process, the judge adopted the jury’s death sentence recommendation.
In today’s decision, the Supreme Court majority held that the 12th District erred when it overturned as an “abuse of discretion” the trial judge’s declaration of a mistrial in the original sentencing phase. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer said that to qualify as an abuse of discretion, the action of a trial judge must be more than an error of law or judgment but must rather be “ … not justified by, and clearly against reason and evidence,” or reflect an “attitude (that) is unreasonable, arbitrary or unconscionable”
The Chief Justice wrote: “The trial judge’s action in excluding the evidence in question here simply cannot be described in the above terms. The central task of the jury in the penalty phase of a capital case is to ‘determine whether the aggravating circumstances the offender was found guilty of committing are sufficient to outweigh the mitigating factors present in the case.’ R.C. 2929.03(D)(2). A trial judge cannot be said to have acted arbitrarily or unconscionably merely because he exercised caution to ensure that the jury focused its attention on that task. Here, the trial court could reasonably have determined that these particular exhibits had an excessive tendency to focus the jury’s attention on the aggravated murder itself and away from the aggravating circumstances and mitigating factors that the jury was required to balance.”
While acknowledging that a different trial judge could reasonably have held that the challenged items of evidence were admissible in the penalty phase, Moyer said the question before the Supreme Court “is whether, in excluding (the challenged evidence), the trial judge acted arbitrarily, unreasonably or unconscionably. On the record before us, we cannot conclude that he did.”
Based on that finding, the Chief Justice wrote that “(t)he jury’s recommendation of death was tainted by its exposure, during penalty-phase deliberations, to evidence that the trial court had reasonably excluded from that phase. Therefore, that recommendation cannot serve as the basis for a death sentence in this case. It follows that the court of appeals erred in holding the declaration of a mistrial by the trial court to be an abuse of discretion. We therefore sustain Hancock’s first proposition of law, vacate his death sentence, and remand for resentencing.”
In clarifying its remand order, the Court cited language from the capital sentencing statute in force when Hancock’s crime was committed, former R.C. 2929.06(B), that specifically includes the death penalty and life imprisonment without the possibility of parole as options available to the court when a defendant is resentenced “because of error that occurred in the sentencing phase of the trial.”
Chief Justice Moyer’s opinion was joined by Justices Paul E. Pfeifer, Maureen O’Connor and Judith Ann Lanzinger.
Justice Alice Robie Resnick entered an opinion, joined by Justices Evelyn Lundberg Stratton and Terrence O’Donnell, partially concurring and partially dissenting from the majority holding. While she concurred with the majority affirmance of Hancock’s aggravated murder conviction, Justice Resnick wrote that she would also affirm the 12th District’s finding that the trial court abused its discretion in declaring a mistrial, and would therefore uphold the death sentence imposed on Hancock by the trial court.
Citing several of this Court’s prior decisions in death penalty cases, Justice Resnick said R.C. 2929.04(B) not only permits trial juries to revisit guilt-phase evidence about the “nature and circumstances of the crime” when they make their sentencing recommendation, the statute affirmatively requires that such evidence be reviewed in the penalty phase. The purpose of that review, she noted, is to establish whether and to what extent the defendant is entitled to mitigation of his sentence based on the specific circumstances under which the crime took place.
Quoting from the Court’s 1987 holding in State v. Stumpf, Justice Resnick wrote that, “ … although the nature and circumstances of the offense may not be used as aggravating circumstances, we have held that they may be cited ‘as reasons supporting [a] finding that the aggravating circumstances were sufficient to outweigh the mitigating factors.’”
- 30 -
Contacts:
Representing the State of Ohio and Warren County prosecutor’s office:
Andrew Sievers, 513.695.1335
Representing Timothy Hancock:
Joseph E. Wilhelm, 614.466.5394
DECISION SUMMARIES
Wednesday, Feb. 1, 2006
Court Affirms Conviction for Lebanon Prison
Murder, Orders New Sentencing Process
state v. hancock, case no. 2003-2099
12th district court of appeals (warren county)
COLUMBUS – The Supreme Court of Ohio today unanimously affirmed the aggravated murder conviction of Timothy Hancock for the November 2000 strangulation killing of Jason Wagner while Wagner was Hancock’s cellmate at the Warren Correctional Institution in Lebanon. In reviewing the trial court’s sentencing process, however, the Court held 4-3 that because the jury inadvertently reviewed evidence the trial judge had ordered excluded from the penalty phase of the trial, the jury’s recommendation of a death sentence was invalid. Based on that finding, the case was remanded to the Warren County Common Pleas court for a new sentencing hearing.
Hancock, who was serving a term at the Lebanon prison facility for a prior aggravated murder conviction, tricked Wagner into letting Hancock tie his arms and legs to a bed frame, and then strangled Wagner to death using a rolled-up and knotted bed sheet. When guards discovered the crime, Hancock said he killed Wagner because Wagner had bragged about molesting a child.
At trial, a jury found Hancock guilty of aggravated murder with one death penalty specification, the trial court, after conducting a bench trial, found Hancock guilty of a second death specification. At the start of the penalty phase, the judge ruled that in considering whether to recommend a death sentence or an alternative term of life imprisonment, jurors should not be provided with several items of evidence they had been permitted to review during the guilt phase of the trial. Excluded items included Hancock’s statement to investigators, photos of the crime scene and the actual bed-sheet ligature he had used to strangle the victim. The jury retired to deliberate and subsequently returned a death penalty recommendation.
After the jury had reported its verdict, however, the judge discovered that the statement and other items of evidence he had ordered to be excluded from the penalty phase had inadvertently been sent to the jury room, and had been considered by jurors in arriving at their death penalty recommendation. Finding that this error could not be undone and was “presumptively prejudicial” to Hancock, the judge declared the penalty phase of the case a mistrial, and ruled that under the circumstances he must disregard the jury’s death penalty recommendation. Without conducting his own independent weighing of aggravating and mitigating factors in the case, the judge proceeded to impose a sentence of life in prison without the possibility of parole.
The state appealed to the 12th District Court of Appeals, which ruled that the contested evidence viewed by jurors was admissible in the penalty phase of the trial, and held that the trial court had abused its discretion in declaring a mistrial based on the jury’s exposure to that material. The Court of Appeals reinstated the jury’s recommendation of a death sentence, and remanded the case to the trial judge for his independent weighing of the aggravating and mitigating factors as required by the state’s capital sentencing statute. After conducting that weighing process, the judge adopted the jury’s death sentence recommendation.
In today’s decision, the Supreme Court majority held that the 12th District erred when it overturned as an “abuse of discretion” the trial judge’s declaration of a mistrial in the original sentencing phase. Writing for the Court, Chief Justice Thomas J. Moyer said that to qualify as an abuse of discretion, the action of a trial judge must be more than an error of law or judgment but must rather be “ … not justified by, and clearly against reason and evidence,” or reflect an “attitude (that) is unreasonable, arbitrary or unconscionable”
The Chief Justice wrote: “The trial judge’s action in excluding the evidence in question here simply cannot be described in the above terms. The central task of the jury in the penalty phase of a capital case is to ‘determine whether the aggravating circumstances the offender was found guilty of committing are sufficient to outweigh the mitigating factors present in the case.’ R.C. 2929.03(D)(2). A trial judge cannot be said to have acted arbitrarily or unconscionably merely because he exercised caution to ensure that the jury focused its attention on that task. Here, the trial court could reasonably have determined that these particular exhibits had an excessive tendency to focus the jury’s attention on the aggravated murder itself and away from the aggravating circumstances and mitigating factors that the jury was required to balance.”
While acknowledging that a different trial judge could reasonably have held that the challenged items of evidence were admissible in the penalty phase, Moyer said the question before the Supreme Court “is whether, in excluding (the challenged evidence), the trial judge acted arbitrarily, unreasonably or unconscionably. On the record before us, we cannot conclude that he did.”
Based on that finding, the Chief Justice wrote that “(t)he jury’s recommendation of death was tainted by its exposure, during penalty-phase deliberations, to evidence that the trial court had reasonably excluded from that phase. Therefore, that recommendation cannot serve as the basis for a death sentence in this case. It follows that the court of appeals erred in holding the declaration of a mistrial by the trial court to be an abuse of discretion. We therefore sustain Hancock’s first proposition of law, vacate his death sentence, and remand for resentencing.”
In clarifying its remand order, the Court cited language from the capital sentencing statute in force when Hancock’s crime was committed, former R.C. 2929.06(B), that specifically includes the death penalty and life imprisonment without the possibility of parole as options available to the court when a defendant is resentenced “because of error that occurred in the sentencing phase of the trial.”
Chief Justice Moyer’s opinion was joined by Justices Paul E. Pfeifer, Maureen O’Connor and Judith Ann Lanzinger.
Justice Alice Robie Resnick entered an opinion, joined by Justices Evelyn Lundberg Stratton and Terrence O’Donnell, partially concurring and partially dissenting from the majority holding. While she concurred with the majority affirmance of Hancock’s aggravated murder conviction, Justice Resnick wrote that she would also affirm the 12th District’s finding that the trial court abused its discretion in declaring a mistrial, and would therefore uphold the death sentence imposed on Hancock by the trial court.
Citing several of this Court’s prior decisions in death penalty cases, Justice Resnick said R.C. 2929.04(B) not only permits trial juries to revisit guilt-phase evidence about the “nature and circumstances of the crime” when they make their sentencing recommendation, the statute affirmatively requires that such evidence be reviewed in the penalty phase. The purpose of that review, she noted, is to establish whether and to what extent the defendant is entitled to mitigation of his sentence based on the specific circumstances under which the crime took place.
Quoting from the Court’s 1987 holding in State v. Stumpf, Justice Resnick wrote that, “ … although the nature and circumstances of the offense may not be used as aggravating circumstances, we have held that they may be cited ‘as reasons supporting [a] finding that the aggravating circumstances were sufficient to outweigh the mitigating factors.’”
- 30 -
Contacts:
Representing the State of Ohio and Warren County prosecutor’s office:
Andrew Sievers, 513.695.1335
Representing Timothy Hancock:
Joseph E. Wilhelm, 614.466.5394
Please send Tim some cards and letters of support
Tim has been pretty ill recently and it would lift him to hear from some people please.
Timothy L Hancock -A 219467
Death Row
MAN C I PO Box 788
Mansfield, Ohio 44901
Timothy L Hancock -A 219467
Death Row
MAN C I PO Box 788
Mansfield, Ohio 44901
Supreme Court orders resentencing for killer of Lancaster man
Supreme Court orders resentencing for killer of Lancaster man
The Ohio Supreme Court today ordered the resentencing of an inmate who
strangled his cellmate, a Lancaster man who kidnapped and molested a
3-year-old girl and stashed her in an attic in 1999.
The justices unanimously upheld the aggravated murder conviction of
Timothy Hancock and, in a 4-3 ruling, ordered him resentenced for killing
Jason Wagner, 25 on Nov. 13, 2000.
Wagner was serving 44 years to life for the kidnapping and attempted
murder of a Lancaster girl he snatched from her back yard. Police found
the girl bound with duct tape and hidden in the attic of Wagner's home 4
days later on April 29, 1999.
Hancock, 35, admitted strangling Wagner at the Warren Correctional
Institution near Lebanon after the man allegedly bragged about molesting
the girl.
A jury recommended the death penalty for Hancock, but a Warren County
judge imposed a life sentence without parole after discovering the jury
had viewed exhibits he deemed prejudicial during sentencing-hearing
deliberations.
An appeals court later reinstated the jury's lethal-injection
recommendation and the judge imposed the death sentence.
However, the Supreme Court ruled that the jury's original death sentence
recommendation was invalid and ordered a new sentencing hearing for
Hancock.
(source: The Columbus Dispatch)
The Ohio Supreme Court today ordered the resentencing of an inmate who
strangled his cellmate, a Lancaster man who kidnapped and molested a
3-year-old girl and stashed her in an attic in 1999.
The justices unanimously upheld the aggravated murder conviction of
Timothy Hancock and, in a 4-3 ruling, ordered him resentenced for killing
Jason Wagner, 25 on Nov. 13, 2000.
Wagner was serving 44 years to life for the kidnapping and attempted
murder of a Lancaster girl he snatched from her back yard. Police found
the girl bound with duct tape and hidden in the attic of Wagner's home 4
days later on April 29, 1999.
Hancock, 35, admitted strangling Wagner at the Warren Correctional
Institution near Lebanon after the man allegedly bragged about molesting
the girl.
A jury recommended the death penalty for Hancock, but a Warren County
judge imposed a life sentence without parole after discovering the jury
had viewed exhibits he deemed prejudicial during sentencing-hearing
deliberations.
An appeals court later reinstated the jury's lethal-injection
recommendation and the judge imposed the death sentence.
However, the Supreme Court ruled that the jury's original death sentence
recommendation was invalid and ordered a new sentencing hearing for
Hancock.
(source: The Columbus Dispatch)
Sunday, November 27, 2005
More Inmate Affidavits
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
WARREN COUNTY, OHIO EXHIBIT 13
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE No. CR 00CR19073
-vs- Judge Bronson
Timothy L Hancock
Defendant-Appellant
AFFIDAVIT OF EDWARD SMITH
State of Ohio
County of Warren
I, Edward Smith, being duly sworn according to law as follows:
1. I am currently incarcerated at Warren Correctional Institution, inmate 346-408. I have been here since June 11, 1998.
2. Wagner used to be my cellmate, but I asked for him to be removed because he smoked and I don't like smoke.
3. The inmates and guards knew about Wagner's crime and Wagner would talk about it.
4.Wagner would sell himself to other inmates for only a couple of cigarettes. When I asked why he belittled himself like that he said he couldn't get things other ways because he was a child molestor.
5. In all of my time in prison I have never seen an inmate behave like Wagner and be taken such advantage of by other inmates.
6. I told the guards Wagner shouldn't cell with anyone because he was treated so badly, and because he wasn't smart.
7. If someone celled with Wagner, the other inmates assumed that cellmate was having sex with Wagner.
8. On the day Wagner was killed I was in the protective custody unit, cell 123
9. Then Guard Miller bought Wagner into the unit telling us he was to be put there, and no one wanted to cell with him.
10. Later Sgt Gross came back and said You will cell with whoever we decide to put in your cell.
11. Hancock told Miller he did not want Wagner in his cell. They put Wagner in his cell anyway.
12. The next think I heard from Hancock was when he yelled to BJ "You don't have to worry about this cocksucker anymore because he is dead".
13. Later I heard Miller say that state didn't need to worry about Wagner anymore.
14. I did not know Hancock well and only had a few brief conversations with him before this happened.
15. I spoke to the prosecutors before Tim's trial, but was not called as a witness.
16. I was never contacted by Tim's trial attorneys and didn't know they had me listed as a possible defense witness.
17. I would have testified if asked as to my knowledge of these events.
Further Affiant Sayeth naught
Signed Edward Smith
17 June 2004
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 17th day of June 2004
Wendi L Dotson, Attorney at Law
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My commission has no expiration date.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
WARREN COUNTY, OHIO EXHIBIT 13
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE No. CR 00CR19073
-vs- Judge Bronson
Timothy L Hancock
Defendant-Appellant
AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID M MCLOUGHLIN
State of Ohio
County of Lucas
I, David M McLoughlin, being duly sworn according to law as follows:
1. I am currently incarcerated at Toledo Correctional Institution, inmate 189-689.
2. I was housed at Warren Correctional Institution from 1997 until 2003.
3. I knew Tim Hancock from when he was housed at WCI around 1997-1999. I never celled with Tim, but we were housed on the same unit area. Tim didn't bother anyone and I never had any problems with him.
4. I didn't know Jason Wagner, I had celled with him for around 2-3 days in 2000, and I made him stay on his own side of the cell and we didn't and we didn't talk.
5. Wagner wasn't very smart, and functioned like a five or six year old. He would do what other inmates told him to do.
6. On the day of the crime, I was being housed in A side of the PC unit.
7. When the PC/Seg was full they would house inmates in RTU or the Main Segregation area.
8. It was common knowledge among the inmates and the guards what Wagner was in prison for.
9. On the afternoon of Nov 13 2000, between lunch and dinner, I was being moved through the middle area. I could hear Tim yelling that he didn't want Wagner placed in his cell and that he would kill Wagner if he was. Then I heard a guard yell, "he's going in there, deal with it."
10. I didn't know about the crime until the middle of the night when the coroner came into the unit.
11. the staff on that unit seemed uptight afterwards because they knew they had made a mistake placing Wagner in Tim's cell.
12. I gave a statement to the Highway Patrol but was never asked to talk to the prosecutors or Tim's trial attorneys.
13. If asked, I would have testified to my knowledge of these events.
Further Affiant sayeth naught
Signed David M McCloughlin
22 June 2004
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 22nd day of June 2004
Wendi L Dotson, Attorney at Law
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My commission has no expiration date.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
WARREN COUNTY, OHIO EXHIBIT 13
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE No. CR 00CR19073
-vs- Judge Bronson
Timothy L Hancock
Defendant-Appellant
AFFIDAVIT OF JACK E COVERT
State of Ohio
County of Lucas
I, Jack E Covert, being duly sworn according to law as follows:
1. I am currently incarcerated at Toledo Correctional Institution, inmate 267-191.
2. I was housed at Warren Correctional Institution from 1993 until 1997 and then again from about 1999-2001.
3. I was celled with Tim Hancock for about 7 months in 1994-1995. I didn't have any problems with Tim.
4. I was celled with Jason Wagner in 2000 for about 1 week. Wagner would talk about his crime a lot. He would smile and say he got away with it. This made me mad and I told them to take Wagner out of my cell. They took Wagner out of my cell.
5. On November 13 2000, I was in the cell next to Tim on the PC/Seg Unit.
6. when the guards told Tim they were bringing Wagner back and Tim said no, there would be problems if they did.
7. They took Wagner back to his cell, then a short time later, Capt Dane and Sgt Gross and Officer Miller brought Wagner back and told Tim "we're moving him in here, deal with it" Tim told them not to put Wagner in there.
8. Before they moved Wagner into the cell, Tim told them to get a nurse and Tim talked to a psych nurse.
9.I didn't hear anything until Tim called me and told me to throw my line. He attached coffee to my line. I asked what he was doing and he said I killed that bitch.
10. I called Red back to our cells and Red yelled when he looked in Tim's cell and ran back to the desk.
11. i gave a statement to the Highway Patrol about what happened.
12. After I talked to the police, the guards harassed me for making my statement. I complained to Shirley Pope about my treatment but nothing happened to stop the harassment.
13. I wanted out of Warren because of this harassment so I kicked off my sink so I would be placed on administrative control. They moved me to SOCF after that.
14. I was never asked to talk to the prosecutor or Tim's trial attorneys.
15. I would have testified if asked about my knowledge of these events.
16. The RTU unit was used for segregation when they had no room on PC/Seg unit.
Further Affiant sayeth naught.
Signed Jack Covert # 267-191
June 22 2004
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 22nd day of June 2004
Wendi L Dotson, Attorney at Law
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My commission has no expiration date.
WARREN COUNTY, OHIO EXHIBIT 13
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE No. CR 00CR19073
-vs- Judge Bronson
Timothy L Hancock
Defendant-Appellant
AFFIDAVIT OF EDWARD SMITH
State of Ohio
County of Warren
I, Edward Smith, being duly sworn according to law as follows:
1. I am currently incarcerated at Warren Correctional Institution, inmate 346-408. I have been here since June 11, 1998.
2. Wagner used to be my cellmate, but I asked for him to be removed because he smoked and I don't like smoke.
3. The inmates and guards knew about Wagner's crime and Wagner would talk about it.
4.Wagner would sell himself to other inmates for only a couple of cigarettes. When I asked why he belittled himself like that he said he couldn't get things other ways because he was a child molestor.
5. In all of my time in prison I have never seen an inmate behave like Wagner and be taken such advantage of by other inmates.
6. I told the guards Wagner shouldn't cell with anyone because he was treated so badly, and because he wasn't smart.
7. If someone celled with Wagner, the other inmates assumed that cellmate was having sex with Wagner.
8. On the day Wagner was killed I was in the protective custody unit, cell 123
9. Then Guard Miller bought Wagner into the unit telling us he was to be put there, and no one wanted to cell with him.
10. Later Sgt Gross came back and said You will cell with whoever we decide to put in your cell.
11. Hancock told Miller he did not want Wagner in his cell. They put Wagner in his cell anyway.
12. The next think I heard from Hancock was when he yelled to BJ "You don't have to worry about this cocksucker anymore because he is dead".
13. Later I heard Miller say that state didn't need to worry about Wagner anymore.
14. I did not know Hancock well and only had a few brief conversations with him before this happened.
15. I spoke to the prosecutors before Tim's trial, but was not called as a witness.
16. I was never contacted by Tim's trial attorneys and didn't know they had me listed as a possible defense witness.
17. I would have testified if asked as to my knowledge of these events.
Further Affiant Sayeth naught
Signed Edward Smith
17 June 2004
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 17th day of June 2004
Wendi L Dotson, Attorney at Law
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My commission has no expiration date.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
WARREN COUNTY, OHIO EXHIBIT 13
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE No. CR 00CR19073
-vs- Judge Bronson
Timothy L Hancock
Defendant-Appellant
AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID M MCLOUGHLIN
State of Ohio
County of Lucas
I, David M McLoughlin, being duly sworn according to law as follows:
1. I am currently incarcerated at Toledo Correctional Institution, inmate 189-689.
2. I was housed at Warren Correctional Institution from 1997 until 2003.
3. I knew Tim Hancock from when he was housed at WCI around 1997-1999. I never celled with Tim, but we were housed on the same unit area. Tim didn't bother anyone and I never had any problems with him.
4. I didn't know Jason Wagner, I had celled with him for around 2-3 days in 2000, and I made him stay on his own side of the cell and we didn't and we didn't talk.
5. Wagner wasn't very smart, and functioned like a five or six year old. He would do what other inmates told him to do.
6. On the day of the crime, I was being housed in A side of the PC unit.
7. When the PC/Seg was full they would house inmates in RTU or the Main Segregation area.
8. It was common knowledge among the inmates and the guards what Wagner was in prison for.
9. On the afternoon of Nov 13 2000, between lunch and dinner, I was being moved through the middle area. I could hear Tim yelling that he didn't want Wagner placed in his cell and that he would kill Wagner if he was. Then I heard a guard yell, "he's going in there, deal with it."
10. I didn't know about the crime until the middle of the night when the coroner came into the unit.
11. the staff on that unit seemed uptight afterwards because they knew they had made a mistake placing Wagner in Tim's cell.
12. I gave a statement to the Highway Patrol but was never asked to talk to the prosecutors or Tim's trial attorneys.
13. If asked, I would have testified to my knowledge of these events.
Further Affiant sayeth naught
Signed David M McCloughlin
22 June 2004
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 22nd day of June 2004
Wendi L Dotson, Attorney at Law
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My commission has no expiration date.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
WARREN COUNTY, OHIO EXHIBIT 13
STATE OF OHIO
PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, CASE No. CR 00CR19073
-vs- Judge Bronson
Timothy L Hancock
Defendant-Appellant
AFFIDAVIT OF JACK E COVERT
State of Ohio
County of Lucas
I, Jack E Covert, being duly sworn according to law as follows:
1. I am currently incarcerated at Toledo Correctional Institution, inmate 267-191.
2. I was housed at Warren Correctional Institution from 1993 until 1997 and then again from about 1999-2001.
3. I was celled with Tim Hancock for about 7 months in 1994-1995. I didn't have any problems with Tim.
4. I was celled with Jason Wagner in 2000 for about 1 week. Wagner would talk about his crime a lot. He would smile and say he got away with it. This made me mad and I told them to take Wagner out of my cell. They took Wagner out of my cell.
5. On November 13 2000, I was in the cell next to Tim on the PC/Seg Unit.
6. when the guards told Tim they were bringing Wagner back and Tim said no, there would be problems if they did.
7. They took Wagner back to his cell, then a short time later, Capt Dane and Sgt Gross and Officer Miller brought Wagner back and told Tim "we're moving him in here, deal with it" Tim told them not to put Wagner in there.
8. Before they moved Wagner into the cell, Tim told them to get a nurse and Tim talked to a psych nurse.
9.I didn't hear anything until Tim called me and told me to throw my line. He attached coffee to my line. I asked what he was doing and he said I killed that bitch.
10. I called Red back to our cells and Red yelled when he looked in Tim's cell and ran back to the desk.
11. i gave a statement to the Highway Patrol about what happened.
12. After I talked to the police, the guards harassed me for making my statement. I complained to Shirley Pope about my treatment but nothing happened to stop the harassment.
13. I wanted out of Warren because of this harassment so I kicked off my sink so I would be placed on administrative control. They moved me to SOCF after that.
14. I was never asked to talk to the prosecutor or Tim's trial attorneys.
15. I would have testified if asked about my knowledge of these events.
16. The RTU unit was used for segregation when they had no room on PC/Seg unit.
Further Affiant sayeth naught.
Signed Jack Covert # 267-191
June 22 2004
Sworn to and subscribed before me this the 22nd day of June 2004
Wendi L Dotson, Attorney at Law
Notary Public, State of Ohio
My commission has no expiration date.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
