Steve Kurzinger sentenced to life in prison without parole — Full Sentencing

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: All rise. The Geographic Court of Common Pleas is now in session. The Honorable Matthew Rambeau presiding. [00:00:07] Speaker 2: Thank you. Please be seated. On the record, August 5th, 2026, case of State of Ohio versus Stephen Anthony Kersinger, case number 25C000064. Mr. Kersinger is present in the courtroom from the Georgia County Jail with his attorney, Matthew Bangerter, State of Ohio, represented by Assistant Prosecuting Attorney Nicholas Berling and Prosecuting Attorney James Flays. Mr. Kersinger, you previously entered a plea, a guilty plea, to count one of the indictment, aggravated murder, and unclassified felony. A PSI was prepared, and today we are here for sentencing. Mr. Bangerter did file a sentencing memo yesterday, I think. State of Ohio did not file a sentencing memo, but it was not required to do so. Counsel, any additions, amendments, errors in the PSI that need to be corrected? No, you're not. Mr. Kersinger? No, you're not. I know we've got a full courtroom, so everybody that's going to speak, speak clearly and loudly so the court reporter can take down your testimony or whatever you're going to say. And, Mr. Bangerter, the floor is yours whenever you're ready. [00:01:33] Speaker 3: Aaron, we'd ask to reserve our comments for after the state's presentation. [00:01:36] Speaker 2: You don't want to speak at all? [00:01:38] Speaker 3: I prefer to wait until after that. [00:01:42] Speaker 2: Mr. Burling? [00:01:43] Speaker 4: Thank you, Your Honor. Your Honor, at this time we do have three representatives of the victims who are going to be speaking, so I'll have you guys step forward. And if you could just speak, if you can speak your name for the record. [00:01:58] Speaker 2: I would ask anybody that's going to come forward and speak to speak at the podium, please, and direct your comments towards me, not anybody else that may or may not be in the courtroom, okay? Okay. [00:02:09] Marie Ann Brown: Hi, my name is Marie Ann Brown. Do I just start reading? [00:02:14] Speaker 2: If you're going to read, make sure you read slowly. The court reporter is taking everything down. [00:02:19] Marie Ann Brown: Okay. When I think about what you did, I wonder how. How can you go from loving someone so deeply that you would do anything to be with them? Rooting for them to do better, and then brutally killing them. I've never hated anyone as much as I hate you, Steve. I knew this kind of, I never knew this kind of hate even existed. How dare you take Alex away from me, from her kids? How dare you take her chance to live a better life away? You left her in her darkest days, and then when she finally found the light without you, you had to snuff it out. You took your own children's mother away. They will never get the chance to see her at her best. They won't have her at their wedding or introduce her to their kids because of your selfishness. That's all she lived for was to be a better mom, and you took that away from them. You took my best friend away, the one who taught me it was okay to be different, and introduced me to the weird, fun part of life. Alex accepted everyone for who they were, and always saw the best in me. Her laugh made the whole room laugh. She was never perfect, but you took her ability to better herself away further from her. As I look at you sitting there, I feel pity. Pity that your life got so low that you had to kill her to win. I hope you sit in your jail cell and remember the light force Alex was when you fell in love with her, and how you took the light from her eyes in one second of evil selfishness. I hope she haunts you in your dreams and in your daily thoughts, because in reality, Alex won. She made herself better. That's something you can never do. You might have taken her body, but her soul will live on in all of us, remembering the light she brought to this world. Thank you. [00:03:54] Rachel: My name's Rachel. Me and Alex are first cousins. We were the first granddaughters. We were each other's first best friends. And you know, Steve, there was a point in time where I actually rooted for you. I thought, finally, you guys could get better by being separated and actually become sober and decent, better parents, and learn to co-parent together for the betterment of your own children. But it's very evident, as we all stand here today, that she was the only one that could actually do anything to better her life. How is it that this could start off so amicably and result in murder? You're not a hero. You didn't do anything great for anybody. You just added to the long list of trauma that was already a result of your guys' marriage. And instead of trying to be a decent man and father, you chose to act like a child who couldn't take no for an answer. You're nothing but a coward. A little boy who refused to learn to regulate and accept responsibility, nor learned to take accountability. A child who needed a constant bailout for either my grandparents or your own parents. All anybody ever wanted was for her to get her life together and be better, and he murdered her for it. You're disgusting. And I hope you're on. Thank you. [00:05:13] Speaker 2: Thank you. [00:05:14] Speaker 1: It might be a little redundant, sir. This begins and ends with you, Steve. You took vows of marriage before God. You went to Catholic school. You know who God is. As a husband, father, leader of your household. That is where it begins. No discipline, no structures, no jobs. Drugs, alcohol, chaos. From day one, 15 years ago. And she stood right with you. Right with you. You guys get divorced and all of a sudden she's the devil? She capitalized on that. She has been sober since 2021. I'm sorry. She got her life together. She was sober, living on her own, had a house big enough for visitation. Had a job, was not barricaded in a free home, lying in their own excrement, spending the child support money that your kids did not get. Those were you. At what point is doing what the law asks you to do, receiving your recovery, working a program, at what point do you get punished for that? I have my own history and my own crimes that I have to answer for. Christianity says that I have to forgive you, but today is not that day. This is an escape, if you ask me, your honor. This is just an escape. He created the amusement park and decided to kill somebody when he wanted off the ride. You can scream martyr, but you're a coward. You still get out of taking your responsibilities. You're off the hook. Everyone else around you, your family, everyone, countless people, hang because you didn't want to be in there. You. I mean, at this point, you have breath in your lungs. You're welcome. [00:07:46] Speaker 2: Thank you. Mr. Brown? [00:07:47] Speaker 4: Thank you, Your Honor. Aaron, at this time, I know the court has the president's investigation that gives a summary of the case, but what we would like to do is walk the court through in a little more detail the investigation and some of the evidence that was collected. So at this time, I would like to call the stand, Lieutenant, to lease out. [00:08:02] Speaker 2: Okay. Lieutenant, come approach. You're not going to be placed under oath. This is not an evidentiary hearing. So, and I'm going to let Mr. Burling kind of lead you through your testimony. Again, I'm sure you've testified before. Make sure whatever you say is clear and loud and into the microphone. And my court reporter has a more difficult time seeing you, so make sure that we proceed accordingly. Okay. Go ahead, Mr. Burling. [00:08:26] Speaker 4: And, Your Honor, if you could also share the screen. [00:08:28] Speaker 2: So I could put some things up there. Hopefully, I can. Do you want the full screen? [00:08:47] Speaker 4: Yes. There you go. Thank you, Your Honor. Good morning, Lieutenant. Could you just state your name and spell your name for the record? [00:08:55] Speaker 7: Matthew Delisa. D-E-L-I-S-A. [00:08:58] Speaker 4: And you work at Chardon Police Department, right? I do. What is your rank? [00:09:01] Speaker 7: I'm a lieutenant. [00:09:03] Speaker 4: And so what are your everyday duties and responsibilities as lieutenants? [00:09:06] Speaker 7: I do oversee the daily responsibilities and duties of the officers, reviewing reports, arrests, citations, their investigations. I do overview and supervise all the criminal investigations with the Chardon Police Department, along with my administrative duties, scheduling things to that effect. [00:09:31] Speaker 4: And do you ever take part in the investigations themselves, as well? Yes, I do. Okay. So are you familiar with the investigation into the murder that we're addressing today, involving Stephen Kersinger? [00:09:43] Speaker 7: I am. [00:09:43] Speaker 4: So I guess I'd like to direct your attention to June 25th of 2025 at approximately 9:13 p.m. Yes, we did. Okay, and what was the nature of that 911 call? [00:09:58] Speaker 7: The call came in from a neighbor in the 300 block of Irma Drive, Chardon Park Estates, that she heard she believed were gunshots. As she looked out her window to investigate what was going on, she looked across the street. 318 Irma Drive, she noticed a body laying on the front porch, she also gave information that she remembers seeing a silver gray vehicle parked in the driveway that was no longer there. Okay. [00:10:25] Speaker 4: And what did Chardon officers discover when they arrived on scene? [00:10:29] Speaker 7: We had two of our officers respond, as they reached the 318 Irma Drive address, they did notice a deceased female, later identified as Alexandra Kersinger, on the front porch, with a parent gun shot wounds to the face, and she is the sole occupant of that residence. [00:10:50] Speaker 4: So no one else was in the residence? [00:10:51] Speaker 7: No one else, no. [00:10:54] Speaker 4: How was, how quickly after receiving that 911 call was the defendant taken into custody? [00:11:00] Speaker 7: I want to say it was anywhere between a half hour to 40 minutes. [00:11:04] Speaker 4: And where did that occur, and how did that go down? [00:11:06] Speaker 7: That occurred on, actually, in Lake County, Concord Township, on Ravenna Road. Apparently, after the shooting, the defendant went to the Ravenna Road address, made contact with the residents there, Christina Newman, and I believe Nathaniel Woolley lived there. Well, they confronted each other out in the driveway there, where, at that time, Mr. Kersinger admitted to killing his ex-wife. In turn, Ms. Newman contacted the police department, sheriff's officers arrived, took Mr. Kersinger into custody, and secured the gray-silver vehicle that he came to the house in. [00:11:48] Speaker 4: And then, did Chardon officers take custody of him from the bay? [00:11:51] Speaker 7: Yeah, yes. As they were, Chardon and Adjiawa County deputy officers responded to custody of both their vehicle and them. [00:11:58] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:11:58] Speaker 4: And in looking in the vehicle, were officers able to find anything of note at that time? [00:12:04] Speaker 7: Yes. As they looked in the vehicle, in plain view, they can see a black gun, and it would have been in the driver's door compartment, like a pouch in the door compartment, driver's front door compartment. They also noticed a gun magazine next to that gun, a wallet up close to where the door handle is, and a loose 9-millimeter round next to that wallet. [00:12:32] Speaker 4: And if you look at the screen, I'm going to show you, it's unmarked in States Exhibit 1, a photograph. So, what does that photograph depict? [00:12:41] Speaker 7: That shows the weapon in the pouch, magazine next to it. If you look above, there's the black wallet with the loose 9-millimeter round. That would be right around here, correct? Yes. [00:12:54] Speaker 4: And was the gun processed by DCI? Yes, it was. And were they able to determine if this was the gun used in the murder? [00:13:01] Speaker 7: That was the gun used in the murder, yes. [00:13:03] Speaker 4: Okay. Now, you also mentioned that there's a wallet in that picture. Did you find anything of note in that wallet? [00:13:08] Speaker 7: Yes. When we inventoried the wallet, we found the defendant's driver's license in there, along with his Social Security card, numerous credit cards that came back to him. We found some loose cash. I think it was about $3 or $4 in cash, along with some business cards. And we also found a white, like a credit card receipt from a gold star pawn in Willowick for about, I think it was $288 and some change. I'm going to show you what we've marked the States Exhibit 2. [00:13:40] Speaker 4: Do you recognize that? [00:13:42] Speaker 7: Yes, that's the receipt that we found in the wallet. [00:13:44] Speaker 4: Okay. And was there a date on the receipt? [00:13:47] Speaker 7: It was June, yeah. [00:13:49] Speaker 4: If you can read that. [00:13:50] Speaker 7: June 13, 25. [00:13:54] Speaker 4: So that would have been, what, about 12 days prior to the murder? That's correct, yes. So, did Chardon follow up at all with Gold Star Pawn to determine what this receipt was for? Yeah. [00:14:07] Speaker 7: We followed up with Gold Star Pawn immediately, contacted them. They were able to look up the purchase. We found out that a gun was purchased on that date by the defendant, a 9mm Taurus, I think it's a model G2C handgun, and a box of 9mm ammunition. I believe it's a blazer brand. [00:14:33] Speaker 4: And you said you were able to confirm it. How did you confirm that it was him, in fact, using the store? [00:14:39] Speaker 7: Well, we got the actual, the original receipt. We actually got video from him in the store purchasing the weapon. And I'm going to show you State's Exhibit 3. Do you recognize that? Yes, that's a photograph and video that we received of the defendant holding it down that he purchased. [00:15:04] Speaker 4: Now, you mentioned that the gun matched the shooting. You also, though, mentioned that he purchased some ammunition. Yes. And the ammunition that he purchased, do you remember how many rounds there were? [00:15:18] Speaker 7: It was a 50-round box of ammunition. [00:15:22] Speaker 4: Then, kind of jumping forward in your investigation, but taking into consideration the shells that were located on scene, the bullets in the magazine, the loose round, and then the ammunition you found in the vehicle. Were you able to, that all, that, add up to 50 rounds? [00:15:41] Speaker 7: That all added up to 50 rounds. Yes, correct. [00:15:49] Speaker 4: Now, that night, when the defendant was taken into custody, did Chardon officers receive any information regarding the defendant's movements prior to and after the shooting? [00:16:03] Speaker 7: Yes. [00:16:04] Speaker 4: And, first of all, where did that come from? [00:16:06] Speaker 7: We actually, during the course of our investigation, we got video from places all around the Chardon area, before, during, and after the incident. We were also able to track his route through a Life 360 app that shows his locations at various times throughout the day. [00:16:26] Speaker 4: And, Your Honor, in State's Exhibit 4, what we've done is compiled segments of this, the video that Lieutenant DeLisa has referenced. It's about 60 minutes. I'm not going to play the whole thing. I'll be jumping ahead, but I'll just have him explain what we're seeing and what the video shows. So, Lieutenant, first of all, I know up in the corner, we see a date and time stamp of June 25th of 2025, 2058, so that would have been about 8.58, correct? Correct. And I'll pause it back. Where is that camera, where is that footage coming from? [00:17:06] Speaker 7: That first footage that we showed here, right, that's coming from the residence of Chardon, which is on the northeast corner of Grant Street, Chardon, Windsor, and South Hamden Street, facing west. Okay. [00:17:20] Speaker 4: And in relation to where the murder occurred, where is this? [00:17:26] Speaker 7: Kind of hard to see. Up in the middle, you can see a stop sign, right by that area, that is Irma Drive. The address was 318 Irma Drive, so that's where the vehicle came from. [00:17:38] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:17:39] Speaker 4: And so I'll start playing it, and if you can let us know if you see the defendant's vehicle. [00:17:46] Speaker 7: Yeah, right there. And he goes from Irma Drive, stop sign, takes a left, heading westbound on South Hamden Street, up to North Charlottesville. And here's the vehicle again, at the top of Chardon Square, continuing heading westbound on the Water Street. That view right there is from the Chardon Fire Department, which is, I think, down in the northeast corner of the square. This is the second view from the Chardon Fire Department, vehicle coming up to the stop sign, stopping and then continuing westbound over the top of the square on the Water Street, westbound. And is this darker silver? [00:18:30] Speaker 4: Yeah, the darker gray vehicle. I'm going to jump ahead a bit. What are we seeing here? [00:18:40] Speaker 7: That is Maple Leaf Plaza, specifically Sheetz parking lot right there. [00:18:46] Speaker 4: And this would be another angle from Sheetz? That's correct, yes. And this would have been if he just continued straight on the road here? [00:18:53] Speaker 7: Yeah, if he were to continue straight on the Water Street, this takes you right down the Sheetz at the bottom of the hill. [00:18:58] Speaker 4: And is this, in fact, him, again, parking? That is correct, yes. [00:19:06] Speaker 7: And what are we seeing here? You see him walking in the sheets. He's walking back by the coolers. Eventually, he takes a right. The top right-hand corner are restrooms, so he goes in the restroom for a while. Doesn't purchase anything. [00:19:29] Speaker 4: And then, is this him then leaving? [00:19:32] Speaker 7: Yeah, that's right. [00:19:32] Speaker ?: Yeah, that's right. [00:19:32] Speaker 7: And he's going past the registers and out the same door he came in. [00:19:36] Speaker 4: And it appears he's on a cell phone texting someone like that. [00:19:39] Speaker 7: Yes, that is him. Blue shirt, khaki, shorts. [00:19:49] Speaker 4: So then this would be him returning to his vehicle after he's in the bathroom? The other angle that we saw earlier. And then is that him returning? [00:20:04] Speaker 7: Yeah, he goes the same route as he went to Sheetz, eastbound up Water Street, over the top of the square, back on the south end of the street, eastbound, to where he comes up to Irma Drive again and then turns on to Irma Drive. [00:20:22] Speaker 4: And I know it's somewhat blocked by a vehicle here, but we saw it. Yes. The vehicle's starting to turn? [00:20:27] Speaker 7: Yeah, I'd see turning in where those other vehicles are. [00:20:32] Speaker 4: And that would then would be in the direction of the victim's residence, correct? That's correct, yes. I'm going to pause things here at approximately 21 or 10 or 9, 10 p.m. for a moment. So, Lieutenant, were you also able to obtain the defendant's cell phone during the investigation? Yes, we were. And were you able to do an extraction of the cell phone? [00:21:04] Speaker 7: Yes. [00:21:05] Speaker 4: And did you locate any text messages between him and the victim from that day prior to the incident? [00:21:11] Speaker 7: Yes, we did. [00:21:12] Speaker 4: Okay, I'm going to pull it up and I think you also have a copy in front of you. This is State's Exhibit 5, the text messages. And just to explain it, when the extraction was done, it pulled each text three times, correct? Yeah, they extracted it three times, [00:21:26] Speaker 7: so they didn't send three of the same text messages. [00:21:29] Speaker 4: We're just looking at the text in the column, so outgoing means that he is sending this message, correct? That's correct. And if it says incoming, it means he's receiving the message. Yes. And these messages were sent to the victims, sent to and from the victim's phone? [00:21:42] Speaker 7: That's correct. [00:21:43] Speaker 4: And the name that he put in there, that would have been the name that he assigned to her? [00:21:46] Speaker 7: Exactly. [00:21:47] Speaker 4: Okay, and then in the description is the text, the conversation, correct? [00:21:51] Speaker 7: That's correct. [00:21:52] Speaker 4: Okay, could you read that first text for me? [00:21:55] Speaker 7: Yes. Hey, I have a couple things I was wanting to talk to you about, like holidays and such. I was wondering if I could swing by so we could discuss before court, question mark. [00:22:06] Speaker 4: Okay, so this reference to court, in the course of your investigation, were you able to determine what he's referring to? [00:22:12] Speaker 7: Yes, they had an ongoing custody dispute, I believe it was up in Lake County, for the children, visitation means of that effect. [00:22:21] Speaker 4: And were you able to determine when their next court hearing was? [00:22:23] Speaker 7: Yes, their next court hearing was supposed to be on the 26th of June, the very next day. Very next day, okay. [00:22:32] Speaker 4: And so then the next text, he, she responds, right, because it's incoming, she's saying she's working but will be home around 3 and that she has visitation, correct? [00:22:42] Speaker 7: Correct. [00:22:43] Speaker 4: And then he refers to maybe talking about getting together after visitation, talking about wanting to co-parent better, again, working things out, prior to the court hearing, correct? [00:22:56] Speaker 7: That's correct. [00:23:00] Speaker 4: And then, so you're talking about meeting up, and what does she say about meeting up? You're on number 10. [00:23:08] Speaker 7: Yeah, no, she responds back, you can stop over after visitation, but I'm telling you now, you're not allowed any name-calling or yelling. she says, I will walk out and that there are cameras outside, too. [00:23:24] Speaker 4: And then she proposes around 7 p.m., it looks like. That's correct. And then he responds, what does he suggest? [00:23:31] Speaker 7: Yeah, he responds, we can go back, we can go, go to a park or for a drive. If you feel better about that, I just want to have a plan. [00:23:42] Speaker 4: And then he says, Christina, we'll be there, no kids, just I'm talking about the kids. Yes. And what is her response to his suggestion to leaving the residence? [00:23:51] Speaker 7: She just basically says, hey, we can stay in the driveway, stay in my driveway. [00:23:55] Speaker 4: And he agrees to that. He agrees, yes. And then these two things, it looks like, would those just be consistent with maybe making a quick phone call to that number? Yes. Yeah, those two calls right there. Okay. And then, at 9, 10, these last ones, what does he say? Text her. [00:24:12] Speaker 7: At 9, 10, I believe this was him coming back from Sheetz that he just texted her back that I'm back. Mm-hmm. He was going to be back at the residence at the 318 room. [00:24:24] Speaker 4: So, then, Your Honor, going back to the video, we have the timestamp of 9, 10 up in the corner. I'm just going to play this last a couple minutes. [00:24:41] Speaker 1: and then, I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:24:44] Speaker ?: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:07] Speaker 4: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:13] Speaker 7: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:15] Speaker 4: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:18] Speaker 7: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:21] Speaker ?: I'll be back to the house. [00:26:22] Speaker 4: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:32] Speaker 7: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:26:39] Speaker ?: I'll be back to the house. [00:26:39] Speaker 7: I'll be back to the house. [00:26:40] Speaker ?: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:27:02] Speaker 4: I'll be back to the house. [00:27:03] Speaker 7: I'll be back to the house. [00:27:04] Speaker ?: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:27:31] Speaker 4: I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. I'll be back to the house. [00:27:47] Speaker 7: There were two gunshot wounds. [00:27:49] Speaker 4: And you reviewed the autopsy report. What were the findings? Where were these gunshot wounds located? [00:27:54] Speaker 7: There were two to the front of the face. One was on the left side up by the nasal. I believe they called this a nasal bridge. Entered in through there. When they did the autopsy, they did find a bullet fragment from that round going in. So there was no exit wound from that shot? [00:28:12] Speaker 4: That's correct. [00:28:13] Speaker 7: No exit wound from that shot. [00:28:14] Speaker 4: How about the second shot? [00:28:16] Speaker 7: The second one was in the right cheek area. Went through, exited up, but left back, I believe up to the scalp area. And yeah, an exit wound. We were unable to locate that round. [00:28:31] Speaker 4: And did they make any determinations of whether either, which one of those caused the death? [00:28:41] Speaker 7: They said either one would have been a fatal shot. [00:28:45] Speaker ?: The other one would have been a fatal shot. [00:28:46] Speaker 4: Now, while her body was still on scene, were you able to view her body? Yes, I was. And did you notice anything regarding the gunshot wound to her right cheek? I did. [00:28:58] Speaker 7: When I went up to examine the gunshot wound on the cheek, I found what they call stippling, which is scratching, small scratch marks, burn marks, and they come from the muzzle of the gun. So when the gun is fired, projectiles come out and do kind of like a discoloration, some scratching on the face. [00:29:27] Speaker 4: So for that to happen, about how close generally does a gun need to be to a body? [00:29:32] Speaker 7: It is a very close range shot. It would have to be close, very close for that to occur. [00:29:38] Speaker 4: Now, again, it's been mentioned there's two gunshots that have happened, two wounds. Were you able to recover the casings for both of those? Yes, we were both casings at the same. I'm going to show you first state's exhibit six. So, I know we have a couple of placards here. Do you remember where the first casing was found? [00:30:01] Speaker 7: The first casing is number one. It's right out in front of the porch on the front lawn. [00:30:06] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:30:07] Speaker 4: And then where was the second casing from? [00:30:10] Speaker 7: We can see the porch on the left. That number five is where the second casing was found directly to the right of the porch. Okay. [00:30:22] Speaker 4: And when casings are ejected, can you kind of explain what happens when a casing is ejected from a firearm? [00:30:27] Speaker 7: Yeah, sure. When a shot's fired, obviously the round goes out. The case is ejected through a port on the right part of the gun. So, when it ejects, it obviously tends to go to the right. [00:30:43] Speaker 4: And how far generally is there? Yeah. [00:30:48] Speaker 7: Yeah. It can be, you know, a couple feet. It could even be inches as well, so. [00:30:55] Speaker 4: And then when the victim's body was removed from the seat, did you find anything of note under where she was laying? [00:31:03] Speaker 7: Yes. Yeah. The top of the porch where the victim was found, it's like a composite wood, like Trex decking platform on top of the wood. So, when they removed the victim in the head area where the gunshots were located, they found what they call a ballistic impact. So, you know, when the gunshot wound to the cheek, the gunshot wound to the cheek, there was an exit wound on the back of her head. [00:31:42] Speaker 4: Yes, it was. And would that have been consistent with this ballistic impact? Yes. And I think you also mentioned that you ended up never finding the actual bullet. [00:32:03] Speaker 7: We did not find the round of that. That's correct. All right. [00:32:06] Speaker 4: So, Lieutenant, based upon your investigation and everything you've gone through here, were you guys able to put together a belief of how the shooting went down? Yes. Could you explain that too? [00:32:19] Speaker 7: Yeah. Just based upon our investigation, the evidence that we located, obviously help from the medical examiner's office and BCI crime scene investigators. He believed that Mr. Kersinger came back to 318 Army Drive approximately at 9:10 that evening, pulled his car in the driveway, exited the car with his 9mm pistol, approached the victim who was on the porch, the front porch at the time. He followed that closer. He filed one round, which went in the left side, striking the, you know, the bridge, nasal bridge, which dropped the victim to the ground. He approached closer up to the porch and ended up, like I said, close range, fired a second round, which went through the cheek, exited out through the back of the head, and then causing that ballistic impact on the track stacking. Then he entered the vehicle, left the scene, and was eventually arrested at Revenner Road. [00:33:24] Speaker 4: And again, we heard those gunshots that were just before about 9:10 p.m. Yes. The 911 call comes in at 9:13, correct? That's correct. And he's out of there at pretty much immediately, correct? Yes. Thank you. I have nothing for it. [00:33:39] Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. DeLay, so you may step down. Sure. Officer Lieutenant. [00:33:44] Speaker 8: Mr. Verling, any additional evidence or, I guess it's not really evidence, but any additional witnesses? [00:33:58] Speaker 4: Mr. Clay, no more witnesses and Mr. Clay will have a statement. All right. [00:34:02] Speaker 9: Thank you, Your Honor. Just briefly, the state's argument. We often talk about the worst form of the offense. And, you know, with aggravated murder, premeditated murder, what is the worst form of the offense? You know, in that situation, how do you differentiate? A life is taken. Here, a mother was murdered at her own home. And the state wanted the court to focus on the aggravated circumstances, what the court just heard from Lieutenant DeLisa and the outstanding investigation that the Chardon Police Department did in this case. Look at the pre-sentence report, the defendant's statement. We had our first decent discussion about four years. I wasn't going to go through with it. So, that's what his plan was that day. And that's what the evidence shows. Twelve days before, he's at the pawn shop purchasing the murder weapon and taking aim in that photo at the counter, thinking about killing her. He lured her into a meeting to talk about their kids. She had had a visitation earlier that day, and they had the court the very next day. But this defendant had a plan that Alex was never going to make it to that court hearing for her kids. And the defendant executed his plan, and that's exactly what this was, an execution. He had a plan to direct the court to look at those text messages. He tries to lure her into his car. He tries to get her to go to the park to talk about this. And she was obviously concerned. She says, "No, we're doing this in my driveway, and I have cameras." So, she was obviously concerned about this. And then he goes there, and he has this conversation with her. And then he leaves. And he could have just kept driving. He could have went to Sheetz, used the bathroom, and driven away. But he didn't. He thought about it. He got back in his car. He drove back. He texted her, "I'm back." And then he walks up and shoots her in the face. And as she's lying on her doorstep, he walks up to her, and at close range, shoots her again in the face. To make sure that his plan was completed. This was a cold-blooded, premeditated execution of the mother of his children. And the state hopes that the court takes into account the facts and circumstances of this case when fashioning a sentence. So, thank you. [00:36:38] Speaker 8: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Fleiss. [00:36:43] Speaker 2: Mr. Bangor, you reserved many statements or comments that you wanted to make, as well as a statement from Mr. Kurtzner himself. So, whenever you're ready, you may proceed. [00:36:52] Speaker 3: Thank you, Your Honor. Your Honor, I want to first say that we acknowledge the family who just spoke. Nothing that I'm saying is in response to them. Nothing that I'm saying is attempting to take anything away or minimize any of that grief or loss. Also, the court has heard the state's evidence. I'm not here to dispute that. Not the firearm, the searches, the messages, the videos. Mr. Kurtzner pled guilty to the most serious count on the indictment, with no agreement on sentence, exposing himself to every penalty that the law allows. But I want to talk a little bit about the numbers. Obviously, when we talk about life without parole or parole eligibility after 20, 30, 25 years, the reality is, every one of those options is a life sentence. Every one of those options say that Stephen is going to spend his life and die in custody of the DRC. Unless, decades from now, the adult parole authority affirmatively finds otherwise based on what happened in the decades intervening. So, we're not asking the court to decide when he goes home. We're just asking the court to decide when somebody can ask the question. If the court imposes parole eligibility after 20 years, he's going to be 57. After 25 years, 62. And after 30 years, 67. He'll have spent the remainder of his adult healthy life in prison regardless. And the parole authority doesn't owe him anything at that time. They can say no. They can say no the first time. They can say no every single time. But they'll be making that decision based on 20, 25, 30 years of evidence that we don't have yet. The life without parole is the finding that a person is beyond the reach of any evidence that hasn't happened yet. Any rehabilitation. Anything that he does in the next decades. I'm not going to minimize the offense. We talk about the worst of the offense, and this is the worst kind of offense. But even so, there are different defendants who catch these kind of cases. There is, Stephen has, he didn't commit this in a course of another felony to conceal an offense. He didn't do it for money. He didn't do it against a child, an elderly person, a police officer. He, no captivity, no restraint, no sexual violence, no flight, no concealments, no destroyed evidence, no lie to police, no prior felonies, no prior prison, no community control, nothing. Life without parole is reserved for people who do have that kind of history and do have those kind of factors. And of course it doesn't make it any less serious for Alexander's family. It's the same seriousness as everyone, either way. But the question is whether his record is the record that the legislature had in mind when they laid out the possibility of life without the possibility of parole. I would say that Stephen plead guilty, but the guilty plea, I would say, is often the least reliable evidence of remorse. It's negotiated, it comes with a lawyer, it comes with discussions and a long court process. But let's look instead at what he did right afterwards. He, before he had a lawyer, before he had accused charged, before there was anything at all to gain, he drove to the house where his kids were. He didn't go inside. When his oldest daughter ran after the car, he told her to get away. He told Christina Newman what he did. He told her to call 911. He did something a person covering up a crime doesn't do. He told her the gun was in the car. He told her where it was. She relayed that to the dispatch. It was already unloaded and left in the door where anyone could see it. When the deputies pulled in, he was already in front of the car, hands already up, complied with every command, completely compliant. He didn't change his clothes. He didn't wipe his hands. He didn't wipe the gun. He asked later why not. He said he didn't want to be accused of tampering with evidence. He was asked why. He told her to call the police and he said he was not going to run from it. Your Honor, he has been ready and willing to take responsibility for this from the beginning. I know we've gone through some litigation and some court hearings that point out to the court that he has always been ready to take accountability. All the extra court stuff was me doing my due diligence and making sure his constitutional rights were provided for. This was never going to go to trial. This was never going to be something that he tried to hide from. I know one of the things we did is we had a sanity report done. We're not here to contest sanity. But mitigation and sanity are different questions. Finding that he's legally responsible for what he's done is not the same as finding that he's well. And I think the court is allowed to weigh those factors. We have decades of records from institutions. We have a pre-sentence report mentioned two psychiatric hospitalizations as a teenager, two more as an adult, both after suicide attempts. We have a history of bipolar, major depression, PTSD, multiple medications over the years, and an unfortunately classic situation where a person who is struggling with these things starts to feel better, so they go off the medication and then they crash again in sort of this cycle that he didn't get off. So again, none of this is an excuse, none of this is to justify anything, but I think it can be used to mitigate that he is not the worst of the worst that Life Without Parole is designed for. He has since that time, even while incarcerated since that day, he's been completing programs, completing a life skills group, dual diagnosis counseling with EMDR, complying with medications. He's enrolling in mental health groups, he's still trying, even now, even with a life sentence of any sort ahead of him, still trying to come to grips with the mental health and get that fixed. So, Your Honor, we, obviously he's going to get a life sentence, as I said, either way, but we would ask that he be allowed to apply for a pro-electrical years. Thank you. [00:43:41] Speaker 2: Thank you, Mr. Banger. [00:43:42] Speaker 3: And, Your Honor, I know that Mr. Kersinger does want to say a few words. I just want to mention, he did have a whole statement written out and unfortunately left it back in his cell, so he's going to do his best, but it was originally intended to be much lengthier, I believe. All right. [00:43:57] Speaker 2: Mr. Kersinger, you may proceed with whatever you need to tell me at this point. You can just do it from the table. Thank you. I just wanted to apologize to the family and friends. [00:44:09] Speaker ?: It was not my intent to hurt anybody except for Alexandra. [00:44:15] Speaker 10: I'm going to continue to work on myself, better myself and hopefully become part of society once more. [00:44:32] Speaker 3: Thank you, Your Honor. [00:44:33] Speaker ?: Thank you. [00:44:35] Speaker 2: Any other witnesses or evidence, Mr. Banger? No, Your Honor, thank you. Any reason why sentence should not be imposed at this time? No, Your Honor. The court has reviewed the PSI, the plea agreement, and heard the statements of all the witnesses, counsel, and the defendant himself, and reviewed the entire record as available to me. Revised code 2929.11 provides that the overriding purposes and principles of sentencing are to protect the public from future crime by the defendant or others, to punish the offender, and to promote the effective rehabilitation of the offender using the minimum sanctions that the court determines accomplishes those purposes without imposing an unnecessary burden on state or local government resources. The sentences must be commensurate with the not demeaning to the seriousness of the offender's conduct and its impact upon the victim. The inconsistent with sentences imposed for similar crimes committed by similar offenders. To achieve these purposes, the court must consider the incapacitation of the offender, deterring the offender, deterring others, rehabilitating the offender, and restitution. Sentences are not based upon race, ethnic background, gender, or religion. The court must also consider the seriousness and recidivism factors outlined in Revised Code 2929.12, factors indicating whether the offender's conduct is more or less serious and whether or not the offender is more or less likely to commit crimes in the future. We don't see murders in Geauga County about once or twice a decade. So as Mr. Bangader points out, my choice is limited. Mr. Kersinger, you're going to prison for life. The question is whether or not I'm going to allow you to truncate that by applying for parole. I am essentially imposing the most serious penalty I can under the law solely within my discretion without the recommendation of a jury. On the other hand, you committed the worst crime that society has. You took the life of another human being. Not in self-defense, not in a fit of rage, but with prior calculation and design. You purchased a firearm, you took it with you, you lay in wait, and you shot her in the face. Presumably, she saw you coming and she knew it was going to happen. She knew she was about to die. Mr. Bangader points out, you didn't run. You didn't attempt to conceal your act. You submitted to police officers, in my opinion, indicating you knew what you did. You knew what you were going to do. You had planned it out. You knew you committed a cold-blooded murder. Alexandra was working to better herself, by all accounts. She was making efforts to right her ship, become a productive member of society again, attempting to become a better mother for her and your children. You took that away. Mr. Bangader and the prosecutor have both used the word "worst version of the offense" or that term. And while if we were in downtown Cleveland, maybe that were true. In Geauga County, the offense itself is the worst version of the offense. This doesn't happen here. And it shouldn't happen here. And as a result of all of those factors and what I have heard today, I am going to sentence you for count one of the indictment of aggravated murder and unclassified felony to life in prison without the possibility of parole. You will be ordered to forfeit the firearm used in the offense, a Taurus handgun. I will not impose a fine. You have served 407 days in the Geauga County jail to this point. And at the state's request, I will be dismissing counts two and three of the indictment. You will be ordered to pay court costs. If you fail to pay any financial penalty or cost, I may order you to perform a 40 hours a month community service, which will not happen in this case. And I will issue judgment for the costs for which execution may issue. You do have the right to appeal or seek leave to appeal the sentence I have imposed. If you're unable to pay the cost of an appeal, you have the right to appeal without payment. If you're unable to obtain counsel for an appeal, counsel will be appointed to you without cost. If you're unable to pay the cost of documents necessary for an appeal, the documents will be provided without cost. You have the right to have a notice of appeal timely filed on your behalf. Mr. Berling. [00:49:28] Speaker 4: Mr. Your Honor, regarding the dismissal, also dismissal of the first specification. Okay. [00:49:34] Speaker 2: What was that specified? [00:49:35] Speaker 4: That was the firearms. All right. [00:49:37] Speaker 2: So we will obviously be dismissing the firearm specification for count one, correct? Correct. [00:49:41] Speaker ?: Anything else? No, you're not. [00:49:43] Speaker 2: Mr. Banger, anything? No, we'd ask the court to appoint counsel for appeal. Okay. I would prefer that you file a motion in writing, please. Certainly. But we will certainly appoint counsel for an appeal. If nothing else, we are adjourned. I am going to ask, you'll be given instructions on how to answer the courtroom, please. So, everybody remain seated until instructed by the deputy secretary. Thank you. [00:49:57] Speaker ?: All rise. All rise. Thank you. Thank you.