Sun Sentinel Palm Beach Edition
Sentence may be delayed longer
Penalty phase for Ibar in Casey’s Nickelodeon murders could be put off once again
It could be longer before a jury decides whether Pablo Ibar is put to death for the notorious Casey’s Nickelodeon murders almost 25 years ago.
Broward Circuit Judge Dennis Bailey ruled Friday that prosecutors seeking the death penalty can bring up Ibar’s plea deal in a 1994 home invasion robbery case that helped identify him as a suspect in the Casey’s Nickelodeon case.
The decision means a likely delay in the penalty phase of Ibar’s trial, which was scheduled to get underway Feb. 25. Ibar’s attorneys now want more time to prepare their case.
Ibar was convicted last month of three counts of murder in the June 6, 1994, shooting deaths of Casimir “Butch Casey” Sucharski and his companions, Sharon Anderson and Marie Rogers. Sucharski, of Miramar, was the former owner of a popular nightspot, “Casey’s Nickelodeon.”
A little over a week after the murders, Ibar and two friends were arrested during a robbery in Miami with key similarities and differences to the Miramar murders. In the Miami case, Ibar and his friends burst into a home, armed, and robbed a woman.
But the victim in that case survived and had ties, including an alleged debt, to one of Ibar’s accomplices — she was not a random target.
Prosecutors have long suspected and alleged that Sucharski was also targeted, but for his flashy wealth, not for a debt.
The arrest in Miami was a factor that led to his identification in the Miramar murders — a Miami detective was the first to notice that Ibar bore a resemblance to the man seen in the video that was secretly recorded by a surveillance camera in Sucharski’s living room.
Ibar never admitted to participating in the Miami robbery — he pleaded no contest in 2000, after he had already been convicted and sentenced to death. He was sentenced in the Miami case to the time he had already served awaiting trial in Broward.
A “no contest” plea accepts the legal consequences for committing a crime, avoiding a trial and counting as a conviction while giving the defendant the ability to say he never admitted anything.
Defense lawyer Joe Nascimento called it a “plea of convenience.” Ibar’s priority since 2000 has been to get off death row and clear his name.
Ibar was granted a new trial in 2016, but the result was another conviction, with sentencing yet to be decided.
And now prosecutors can raise the Miami conviction as evidence that Ibar was undisturbed and unrepentant after the Miramar murders, participating in another robbery barely a week afterward.
Defense lawyers told Bailey that if prosecutors are going to use that conviction, they are going to need time to question the other alleged participants and other witnesses to determine what role, if any, Ibar played in that incident.
Bailey’s ruling Friday came against the backdrop of an appeals court decision that sidestepped an issue defense lawyers are relying on as they plan to challenge the latest guilty verdicts.
Bailey removed a juror from the case earlier this month because the juror had asked questions on social media about regretting his decision to convict Ibar, strongly indicating that he would be a guaranteed vote against the death penalty when the time comes for the jury to make its recommendation.
Defense lawyers appealed the juror’s removal. The appeals court decided this week that they do not have jurisdiction to second guess the judge’s decision in the midst of the trial.
That means the juror stays off the case, but if Ibar is sentenced to death, his defense can raise the issue again as evidence Ibar again did not get a fair trial.
The rest of the jury will return to court as scheduled on Feb. 25, but instead of hearing testimony, they will be checking their calendars to make sure they are available to return for the penalty phase at a later date.
A jury’s recommendation must be unanimous for a judge to impose the death penalty in Florida.