Click here to subscribe today or Login.
First Posted: 9/28/2007
By Terrie Morgan-Besecker [email protected] & Order Reporter
WILKES-BARRE – William Rohland is a cold-blooded killer who showed no mercy to his victims, a Luzerne County prosecutor said. Now it will be up to a jury to decide whether to have mercy on Rohland.
Convicted Thursday of two counts of first-degree murder for the shotgun slayings of Kelli Fasulka and Joey Hernandez, Rohland will face the same jurors on Monday, when they reconvene for a sentencing hearing to determine if he should be sentenced to death or life in prison without the possibility of parole.
Will they show the mercy that Rohland’s attorney, William Ruzzo, said he will seek?
Or will the portrait Assistant District Attorney Michael Melnick painted – Hernandez begging for his life, and Fasulka crawling through her own blood in a desperate attempt to escape, only to have her skull blown away by a shotgun blast – convince them to put Rohland on death row?
Jurors deliberated for just two hours Thursday before finding Rohland guilty of the murders, but acquitting him of three counts of attempted robbery.
Fasulka’s mother buried her head in her hands and quietly sobbed as the verdict was read.
Following the verdict, she and Hernandez’s mother embraced in the hallway outside the courtroom, consoling each other as more than a dozen other family members looked on.
Rohland, 46, of Old Forge, showed no emotion. He declined to comment as he was led away in handcuffs. Several of his family members left the courtroom immediately after the verdict was announced and could not be reached for comment. Members of the Fasulka and Hernandez families also declined comment.
Prosecutors presented 43 witnesses over six days of sometimes graphic testimony regarding the Aug. 15, 2006, slayings of Fasulka, 39, and Hernandez, 23, at Fasulka’s mobile home on Walnut Street in Avoca.
Fasulka was stabbed 18 times before being shot in the head. Hernandez, who authorities said came to Fasulka’s home with another man, Fred O’Shea, to sell cocaine to Rohland, was shot in the arm, chest and head.
Prosecutor: In cold blood
In the most dramatic moment of his more than hourlong closing argument, Melnick grabbed the shotgun used in the slayings and pulled back the action, ejecting one shell at a time as he re-enacted how Rohland “executed” the pair.
Hernandez was the first to die. Shot first through the arm, he pleaded for his life as Rohland lifted the gun and shot him twice more, Melnick said.
Fasulka, meanwhile, was bleeding profusely from a deep slash to her neck, but managed to “muster up her primal strength” and crawl through her trailer and out a back door to her driveway, Melnick said. Rohland located her, reloaded the shotgun, stood directly over her head and fired.
“These two individuals were egregiously wounded and incapable of defending themselves. They were executed in cold blood,” Melnick said.
Rohland, who testified on his own behalf, pointed the blame at Daniel Lock, a friend who had accompanied Rohland to Fasulka’s trailer. He claimed Lock, who was dating Fasulka, killed her in a jealous rage after hearing allegations she had been with another man.
Rohland admitted shooting Hernandez in the arm as the two struggled over the shotgun, but said it was Lock who later fired the fatal shots into Hernandez and Fasulka.
That story was contradicted by Lock, O’Shea and Susan Campbell, Fasulka’s next-door neighbor, who testified she saw Rohland exiting the home with the shotgun.
Defense points blame at Lock
Mark Singer, another of Rohland’s attorneys, attacked the witnesses’ credibility during his half-hour closing argument.
Singer noted Lock, who admitted setting up the drug deal for Rohland, had been granted immunity on drug charges for his cooperation.
“Who drove to the scene? Dan Lock,” Singer said. “Who got the gun? Dan Lock. Who had a relationship with Kelli? Dan Lock.”
Melnick countered that none of the witnesses had any reason to lie.
“It’s a case, simply, of believe it or not,” Melnick said. “Ask yourself. Does any of what (Rohland) said make sense when matching it against the commonwealth’s 43 witnesses?”
Neither Melnick nor his co-prosecutors, Shannon Crake and Thomas Killino, commented after the verdict.
Ruzzo said he knew he had a tough case in convincing jurors Rohland did not commit the murders.
“There were some holes in the commonwealth’s case, but the evidence, at least quantitatively, was there,” Ruzzo said.
Terrie Morgan-Besecker, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 570-829-7179