LIMA — When Judge John O’Donnell acquitted a white Cleveland Police officer of felony charges for his role in a 2012 police chase that ended with 137 shots fired and two unarmed black people dead, he received numerous nasty letters and had to have security around the clock for several days.
“I was well aware it was the verdict that was likely to not be popular,” said O’Donnell, who is running for a seat on the Ohio Supreme Court and visited The Lima News last week.
He also recognizes that decision could cost him votes in the November general election, when he challenges Republican Pat Fischer for a seat on the state’s highest court. O’Donnell is a Democrat.
“I tell people I was presented with a particular set of facts, and I was asked to decide beyond a reasonable doubt, ‘Did this man knowingly cause the death of these two people?’” he said.
O’Donnell acquitted Michael Brelo of two charges of voluntary manslaughter and the lesser offense of felonious assault at a month-long bench trial a year ago. Brelo was the only officer to face criminal charges for the shooting. While Brelo cannot be tried again, the fallout continued with Brelo’s termination earlier this year.
The judge said his ruling was the only decision he could make, based on the evidence he considered, including involvement by 12 other officers after a 22-mile chase through downtown Cleveland that ended in an elementary school parking lot in East Cleveland. The event was captured on video, with Brelo jumping on the hood of the car and firing shots through the windshield at two people inside.
“I afforded Michael Brelo the same Constitutional consideration I afforded any criminal defendant, holding the state responsible to prove the case beyond a reasonable doubt,” he said.
Brelo’s attorney successfully argued to O’Donnell that Brelo’s actions were justified, since he feared for his life and believed the two, Timothy Russell and Malissa Williams, had a gun and fired shots.
O’Donnell’s decision led to turbulent protests through the downtown but no violent riots. O’Donnell said he believes his decision helped maintain the peace in the city partly because he went into great detail to explain how he arrived at his decision and because of the length of time it took to go over the 34-page opinion he wrote.
“I knew whatever the judgment would be, I couldn’t just come out and say guilty or not guilty and then leave the bench,” he said.
He said he understands many people disagree with his decision, but he hopes his explanation led to understanding on how he reached it.
O’Donnell said that experience is one reason he is the best candidate for the Ohio Supreme Court.
“The scrutiny of that case is another reason I will bring different perspectives to the Ohio Supreme Court,” he said.
He understands his decision may have exacerbated race relations in the city, especially between the black community and police, but he said he made the right decision based on law.
Problems with race relations have been ongoing for a long time, he said. To solve those problems, trust has to be established, he said.
“If the trust existed and if people in the community didn’t perceive they were historically mistreated, hopefully they would look at the case and accept the outcome,” he said.
.neFileBlock {
margin-bottom: 20px;
}
.neFileBlock p {
margin: 0px 0px 0px 0px;
}
.neFileBlock .neFile {
border-bottom: 1px dotted #aaa;
padding-bottom: 5px;
padding-top: 10px;
}
.neFileBlock .neCaption {
font-size: 85%;
}
