Donna Roberts
If
this next case proves nothing it proves that when it comes to the
death penalty women are still favored a bit. Just the fact that
Donna Roberts is the only woman on Ohio's death row may tell you
this, but the fact that her sentence of death has been overturned
twice can also lead you to this conclusion. There was always ample
evidence that Donna Roberts was in on the planning of the murder of
her ex-husband, Robert Fingerhut. It was so compelling that she has
been sentenced to death not once, not twice, but three times now.
One of the things that I found extremely interesting in this case is
that in June of 2017 the judge in this case set an execution date of
August 12, 2020. I have never seen an execution date set so far in
advance, let alone from a case that has already been in the courts
since 2003. At first I thought it may have simply been because Donna
Roberts was a woman but then I discovered that her accomplice,
Nathaniel Jackson, who was also sentenced to death is scheduled to
die in July of 2020. Ohio is one of the few states who has continued
for the most part to regularly hold executions so these dates appear
even more puzzling.
Donna
Roberts (this is her maiden name and the name she goes by) was born
in Ohio in 1944. Now you do not often see me tell of someone's birth
year but I think it is a bit fitting here. I know they say that age
should not make a difference with a couple and love is love and all
of that stuff, there are times I have take issue with that. So many
other things come into play in a relationship like life experience
and maturity. There are of course those who are more mature for
their age and those who are less mature. For example it is difficult
to make a relationship work when say one partner is particularly
older than the other and has never had children while the other still
has young children, or particularly say teenagers at home. We all
fall into a routine of how our lives are and it is difficult for
anyone to change habit they have come accustom to when it is vastly
different than what they are used to. This is why I have difficultly
with the alleged relationship between Donna Roberts and Nathaniel
Jackson. In 2001 when Robert Fingerhut was murdered Donna was
fifty-seven years old and Jackson was a mere thirty. Add to this
Donna was apparently fairly well respected and a businessman while by
all account Jackson's biggest issue seemed to be staying out of jail.
Now, I am not going to say that there was not a relationship there
because there were hundred of letters found, as well as jailhouse
phone recordings that proved that there was, but I am left with the
feeling that one was playing the other. I have my opinion on who was
the player, but we'll get to that in a bit.
Donna
has alleged that she came from what she described as a “very, very
abusive” home. She has also claimed that as a child she was
sexually abused by a cousin. One of her more interesting claims is
that she suffered mental injures from “multiple” car accidents
but specifically a brain injury from an accident in 1990. Over the
years her attorney's have used these allegations to fight against her
death sentence. Donna's first marriage occurred in 1966 when she
married William Raymond and later had a son (who I found no other
reference to in my research). They divorced in 1971. By then the
couple had left Ohio and had resided in Florida for several years.
Her next marriage lasted about eight years from 1972 to 1980. Just
when she met and married Robert Fingerhut is not completely clear.
Some reports say they married in 1981, while others say they did not
marry until 1983. The couple moved to Virginia where they lived for
a while and then in 1993 they moved back to Ohio where Donna was
from. By all accounts while they still lived together it appears
that Robert and Donna had divorced. She has claimed that the divorce
was purely for financial and business reasons. Few people that knew
the couple even knew that they were divorced. They continued to live
and project themselves as husband and wife.
When
she lived in Florida Donna had been an assistant to a plastic surgeon
for over twenty years. When she and Robert Fingerhut moved to Ohio
they became business owners. They owned and managed a rental car
company at the airport in Youngstown Ohio. Later they owned and
managed two Greyhound bus stations in the area. She even owned a
restaurant in one of the terminals for a while. According to Donna,
and I have not seen it disputed, most, if not all of the businesses
were in her name. This seems to be the “financial and business”
reasons she gave for their divorce.
At
12:01 am in the morning of December 12, 2001 Donna made a 911 call
stating she had found Robert dead in their home on the kitchen floor
of their Howland Ohio home. She also reported that Robert's car was
missing from the garage. Authorities would discover that Robert had
been shot at least three times, in the back, chest and head. All the
shots appeared to be at close range. There were few reports as to
what investigators may or may not have thought of her demeanor upon
their arrival but they allowed her to leave the home with a relative
but not before they got permission from her to search the home. In a
dresser in her bedroom they found almost 150 letters that Donna had
received from a man named Nathaniel Jackson. They were all sent from
the either the county jail or the state prison. Upon a further
search a bag in the trunk of Donna's car revealed another nearly 150
letters that were letters from Donna to Nathaniel. An examination of
these letters revealed not just an affair but a plot to murder Robert
Fingerhut. Of course she was not immediately arrested when they were
found, they had to be read first.
The
following day Robert Fingerhut's vehicle was found. Inside the car
would be a vast amount of blood. Now my research indicates that
Nathaniel was arrested on this day when it was discovered that his
DNA was in the car as well as the fact that his blood seemed to be
mixed in with Robert Fingerhut's blood in the car. It seems to me to
be highly unlikely that any sort of DNA test results were returned so
quickly, despite the fact that Nathaniel's DNA and prints were
probably in a system some where due to his criminal record. In fact,
Nathaniel had just been released from jail on December 9th.
It was said that Donna was the one who had picked him up. Once
arrested Nathaniel admitted to shooting Robert Fingerhut, but of
course as we often hear, he claimed it was self defense as Robert
Fingerhut had pulled a gun on him. He would (and apparently he
continues) to say that Donna had nothing to do with the “shooting.”
Authorities did not buy it. Two days after the murder Donna too
would be arrested.
Nathaniel
Jackson would go on trial first. He would be convicted and sentenced
to death. Throughout the years the courts have upheld his conviction
and sentence. The last thing I have seen about his case, aside from
his execution date scheduled in 2020, is an article stating that in
February of 2017 he had asked for his case to be re-opened. The main
rason for this is the stand by defense tactic of arguing he had
ineffective counsel at trial. I suspect many of his previous appeals
claimed the same and they are grasping at straws, as is often the
case. I also suspect after all the back and forth in Donna's case
they were hoping to catch a break since she too had filings with the
court at that time.
The
prosecution was able to successfully show the jury in Donna's trial
that she and Nathaniel Jackson had conspired together to murder
Robert Fingerhut. The motive according to the prosecution was a
$50,000 life insurance policy. Witnesses came forward to testify
about a multitude of things such as seeing Donna be openly
affectionate with Jackson out in public immediately after his release
and seeing what appeared to be her car going very slow late on the
night of December 10th
as if she was killing time out on an almost deserted road. One
witness testified that within days, if not hours, of the murder they
had witnessed Donna ask Robert Fingerhut for $3,000 which he denied.
The witnesses stated that Donna was visibly very angry at this.
Personally however, I think this had little impact on her decision to
conspire with Nathaniel to murder Robert Fingerhut because from my
understanding this conversation had taken place so close to the
murder and there was plenty of evidence to show that the plan had
been in place for quite some time. Donna did not testify on her own
behalf but she did apparently give a speech more than an hour long.
It is irritating to me when this happens, although thankfully it
rarely does. She had chosen not to testify likely because she knew
the prosecutor would have handed her her butt, but then she stood up
to say what she wanted to say, even attacking witnesses who had
testified against her. She was ultimately convicted on charges of
aggravated murder, aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary. On
June 21, 2003 she was sentenced to death, for the first time. At her
sentencing the judge commented on the speech that she had made to the
jury, pointing out that she often referred to her own wealth and that
she seemed more disturbed by supposed slights to her character than
from the guilty verdict.
Initially
both her conviction and sentence were upheld by the courts. Then in
2012 the courts determined that there had been some inappropriate
going ons in her original sentencing. It was said that he prosecutor
had been allowed to help the judge write his sentencing decision. I
have to agree that this is highly unusual, nor do I condone, but in
the same respect there was nothing that stated the prosecutor had
helped the judge come to the decision he had made. Either way the
courts sent it back to the lower courts for re-sentencing. Once
again the judge sentenced her to death. Then in 2013 the appeal
court once again sent it back to the lower court for re-sentencing
saying that the judge did not appear to have amply weighed any
mitigating circumstances and information.
I
have two issues with the second appeals court decision to have a
re-sentencing hearing. First, it was said that Donna had waived all
rights to have any mitigating circumstances considered in her trial
and they had only been mentioned apparently in her re-sentencing.
There are two jobs when it comes to appeals court. First they
determine if the trial that was presented was fair. This includes
making sure that all parties have all the information they are
entitled to as well as that decisions made by the judge to allow or
disallow information is correct and things of the sort. Secondly,
appeals courts are allowed to look at any new evidence that may have
come out since the trial had been conducted. Of course there is
always the standby argument of ineffective counsel, but that goes
back to the fairness of the trial. The issues that I have with the
second decision to send her case back to the lower court is that no
mitigating circumstance were given in the original sentencing hearing
as well as it seems that the courts could have little way of knowing
just how much those things were considered by the judge, especially
when they ruled on this in 2013 because the original trial judge had
died. But, regardless, they did send it back to the lower courts.
This time a new judge looked at the case and made his ruling and once
again Donna Roberts was sentenced to death. This was now her third
time.
So,
in 2017 defense attorney's were back in court appealing the death
sentence once again. Their argument this time was that the last
judge could not have been fair in his sentencing because he was not
the trial judge and he had not witnessed things first hand. In June
of 2017 the appeals court finally agreed with the prosecution and
completely upheld her conviction and sentence. The decision was said
to be 6-1 with the only judge dissenting did so almost entirely based
on this opposition to the death penalty in general. This is when they
set her execution date for the year 2020. The defense did not sit
idle for very long. In December of 2017 a filing was made to ask the
United States Supreme Court to look at the case. Of course that case
is pending.
Throughout
all of this one of the children of Robert Fingerhut has spoken at
least to the media, if not the courts. Prior to the murder of his
father, Michael Fingerhut had known Donna Roberts for over twenty
years. He has claimed that not once had he ever heard the abuse
allegations. He also claimed that he had never heard about any brain
injury that she suffered in a 1990 car accident. One would think
seeing as he was family he would have heard or at least known about
if nothing else the car accident if it had in deed happened. I will
say though that I find it extremely curious that it was not until
after her trial and only in one of her first of many appeals that
these allegations were made. Michael would say that the family had
not even been contacted of his death until over a week later, after
his father was buried and only then by an investigator in the case.
I
said in the beginning I believe that either Donna or Nathaniel was
playing the other when it came to portraying a legitimate
relationship. I believe Nathaniel may have in some way believed this
was a real relationship and that Donna truly cared for him as he did
her. Whether Nathaniel is still sticking to his story is unknown but
in his interviews with investigators and in his own trial he would
claim that Donna was innocent. The evidence completely refuted this
and this appears to just be an effort by Nathaniel to protect Donna.
I would gander to guess that in some way Donna convinced him to
murder Robert Fingerhut to obtain the life insurance, as well as the
estate that would have included all the businesses that were in her
name but essentially ran by Robert Fingerhut. It is completely
plausible that in some kind of diluted way Nathaniel thought Donna
truly cared about him and they not only would get away with murder
but live happily ever after. There is little way of knowing if Donna
would have continued to lead Nathaniel on since both were arrested so
soon
Donna
it seems wants to now at least claim that she not only was abusive
apparently physically and sexually as a child but also suffers from
mental issues brought on my car accidents. I find these efforts
nothing more than a ploy to get out of the death sentence she
received. The only reason I believe that they have worked somewhat
with the courts is the fact that she is a woman and she is the only
woman on death row in Ohio. This tells me that juries, as well as
judges, in that state are reluctant to hand down a death sentence to
a woman. This give defense attorney's a bit of a lead way in
defending women in my opinion. First, I have never been fond of in
essence using a bad childhood as an excuse of bad adult behavior.
Few of us could claim to have a “good” childhood but we do not go
out and murder people or plan them. In the same respect you can
often find someone who cannot prove any claims of abuse or a bad
upbringing to claim they were naive and influence by others easily
because of that. It always seem that people who are clearly guilty,
like Donna, attempt these types of defenses and there is always a
lawyer in the background with their hand out to help them.
Although there might be exceptions, or even ample examples to disprove my assumption, I nevertheless at this time highly doubt most men who are accused of terrible crimes such as murder, child abuse and molestation, etc., and who are, in fact, guilty have any illusion that they can cite some claim of having been abused by their fathers, neglected by their mothers, molested by their uncles, and of having been a drug addict since they were teenagers as things which have a realistic chance of mitigating their sentences, let alone preventing their convictions or of having them convicted on lesser charges where available. And, like you, I don't necessarily think those issues should make any difference as to their convictions and sentences. But, however, women in the same or similar situation to the men above seem to have been conditioned by society to believe they can cite a bad past and use it as a strong defense, etc.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, even in the case of the generally non-criminal (I think it might be illegal in some places still, even if not generally enforced, please correct me if you know better) though, as most would agree, immoral act of cheating on a significant other, I don't believe most men really expect their girlfriends or wives, society also, to accept any excuse they might give for their behavior. But, again going back to how it seems society has conditioned women, excuses and blame-shifting seem to be tactics which many of the women who cheat appear more than comfortable with using. And if there was a recent pregnancy and death, especially if the death is that of the child or fetus with whom a woman was pregnant, it's all the more likely a woman could have it in her mind that she can use this tragedy to explain sleeping with other men or of committing a murder, etc., and have many people feel sorry for her and feel her actions were understandable. After all, her reasoning and the moral centers of her brain were diminished, or whatever the specific claims would be, as a result of the tragedy she suffered; allegedly. But the fact that a father also lost his son or daughter means little to nothing. He can't claim he was vulnerable and some woman he knew took advantage of him as his significant other was dealing with the loss and expect anyone to care. Few will think, let alone say, that this makes his cheating or commission of murder understandable.