Smith sentenced to 18 years

Marty Smith has been sentenced to a minimum of six years and a maximum of 18 years in jail after a jury found her guilty as an accessory to involuntary manslaughter and to aggravated assault and battery.

Judge Thomas Rumpke presided over the sentencing on Wednesday, the final milestone on the judicial journey and an opportunity for victims of the crime and supporters of the defendant to speak of the effect the incident has had on their lives and the potential consequences of a jail sentence.

Doug Haar’s stepson spoke to the impact that Haar’s death has had on his family.

“I’ve had a lot of time to research you, I know a lot about you,” he said directly to Smith. “I just want you to know that you’ve ruined a lot of people’s lives.”

He described his stepfather as a role model, saying he “came from nothing to be somebody because of that man”, but Haar’s death from traumatic asphyxiation in the early hours of August 1, 2018 removed that influence from his own life and the next generation of the family.

He accused Smith of failing to grow up, saying, “You didn’t think about your own family and your own kids and that’s terrible”. He further stated that Haar had been in a dark spot after the death of his wife and was a known alcoholic, and Smith’s behavior during their acquaintance exacerbated the issue.

Speaking in support of Smith, a neighbor and her older sister described the difficulties affecting Smith’s life, beginning with her own father’s alcoholism that led to her parents divorcing when Smith was four years old.

“Needless to say, growing up was difficult,” said the visibly upset sister, telling Judge Rumpke that Smith had been close to her older sister until she “drank herself to death” in 2017.

“That was and still is one of the most devastating things to ever happen to our family,” she said.

Meanwhile, said Shull, Smith herself underwent brain surgery in 2013 and was in a motorcycle accident in 2014 and the family has been hit by seven deaths since 2017. Smith drank more after her sister’s death, she said, and would often visit her grave at night and sometimes fell asleep there.

However, said Shull, “Marty has always been an amazing mother.” The night of Haar’s death, “Was the night that alcohol ruined the lives of many people,” she continued, and was a huge and unfortunate wake-up call to Smith.

“Who she was that night is not who she is,” she said, telling the judge that Smith is not a bad person and needs help for her alcohol problem.

“Your honor, I have already lost one sister to alcohol. Please help my sister,” she said.

Smith’s four children also addressed the court, led by her 18-year-old eldest son, telling Judge Rumpke that she is a great mom who works hard to provide for them.

Following these statements, defense attorney Steven Titus made his requests for sentencing, stating that the past cannot be changed but Smith accepts complete responsibility and not a moment goes by that she doesn’t think about what happened.

“Sometimes it takes tragic events to change lives for the better,” Titus said, arguing that the pre-sentence investigation showed Smith to be a low risk for violent recidivism and medium risk for general recidivism, while also having a low history of noncompliance and violence.

The investigation also suggested Smith has substance abuse problems, he said, asking the judge to find her to be an addicted offender. Smith has never been in trouble before for anything except alcohol, he said, speaking to a DUI conviction several years ago.

Titus also read part of a letter of support from Smith’s cellmate, which described Smith’s quick actions when Thomas suffered a stroke and Smith’s aid when she was released from hospital. This speaks to Smith’s compassion and kindness, Titus said.

Titus asked for a suspended sentence with fines at the judge’s discretion. Prosecuting attorney Linda Black, however, felt differently.

Black pointed out firstly that the cellmate has been convicted for distribution of illegal substances and then informed the judge that she has spoken to the lieutenant at the Crook County Detention Center and been told that Smith feels “the rules shouldn’t apply to her” and expects longer visits and more phone calls. This speaks to a sense of entitlement, Black said.

Black also pointed out that Smith has been identified as the primary aggressor in the case: it was her actions, playing two men against one another, that led to the tragedy. “But for Ms. Smith’s actions in this case, Doug Haar would still be alive,” she said.

“It’s pretty clear she enjoys men fighting over her, that’s the situation she created,” Black added.

Black told Judge Rumpke that she didn’t know Haar personally but has heard a great deal about him from family and friends. The one thing they all point out, she said, is that Haar was the first person to be there when someone was in need – and that’s a loss that can never be filled.

Black asked for the maximum penalty on each charge, to be served consecutively.

“I don’t know how else you deter that kind of behavior,” Black said. She argued that probation is not a viable option because, despite the arguments of her family and friends that she needs help, Smith did not seek rehabilitation while she was out on bond and it was only discussed while awaiting sentencing.

In his response, Titus objected that the state had gone too far in saying that “but for” Smith the death would not have occurred. Smith played a role, he said, but there are plenty of “but fors”; for example, Titus continued, “but for” the slow response from law enforcement or “but for” the store clerk’s decision not to assist, Haar might still be alive.

Smith herself was given the opportunity to address the court before Judge Rumpke retired to deliberate.

“I’d like to start by saying how deeply and terribly sorry I am,” she said through tears.

No words could express the magnitude of sorrow Smith feels, she said, addressing Haar’s loved ones as she called him a special man and stated she takes full responsibility for her actions.

“Because of my selfish choices, I wake up every morning missing my best friend and my best friend never wakes up,” she sobbed.

“I have to be held accountable for my actions and I’m sorry you have to suffer as a result,” Smith said to her own family, apologizing for the pain and financial problems her “selfish actions” have caused.

Smith begged for mercy for herself and her “poor kids” and said, “I would like another chance to be the best mother I can be.”

Following a short recess, Judge Rumpke presented his decision. He informed the audience that, while he knows and understands that some people will not agree with his decision, what he cannot tolerate is people not understanding why he made that decision.

The judge first explained his legal opinion from studying past supreme court decisions that the two sentences must be served concurrently as they relate to a single, continuous crime. He acknowledged that Smith likely qualifies as an addicted offender under the Addicted Offender Accountability Act.

However, said the judge, not only is there a lack of alternative treatment within the community, the crime in question resulted in the death of a human being. This requires a term of incarceration, he said, rather than simply rehabilitation.

“Clearly, Ms. Smith, you were the aggressor,” said the judge, stating that Smith has been found guilty of aiding and abetting in causing the death of a person and having done so recklessly and willfully. This was a tragic case, he continued, and the events that led up to the incident also have a criminal element.

“This entire incident could have been avoided” had the behavior leading up to it not been continued, said Judge Rumpke. He also questioned Smith’s commitment to rehabilitation, pointing out that she knew she had an alcohol problem because she received a DUI conviction, but she went right back to what she had been doing once the probation was over.

The need for retribution for the sake of general deterrence outweighs the need for rehabilitation, Judge Rumpke said. The court must make clear to the community that behavior of this kind is unacceptable.

The judge further explained that the large split between six and 18 years is intended to ensure that, even if Smith serves the minimum sentence, she is under supervision for a long time. He told Smith that he will be recommending she be sent to an intensive treatment unit but there is no guarantee she will be accepted because, even though the kind of alcohol abuse and routine nature of her drinking indicates her problem was underreported on the pre-sentence investigation, the score she was given does not make her a priority.

Judge Rumpke declined to impose a fine as part of a sentence, partly because, “A fine cannot undo or remedy the tragedy” and partly because it would not be conducive to rehabilitation once Smith is released and would impact her ability to become a productive member of the community.

He also made note that, while victim and supporter impact statements are borne in mind, the court cannot rule solely on the outrage from or impact to the community.

Smith’s sentence was for six to ten years on the accessory to aggravated assault and battery conviction and six to 18 years on the accessory to involuntary manslaughter charge. Credit will be given for 204 days already served and the sentences will run concurrently; Smith has 30 days to file an appeal.