NEW KENSINGTON, Pa. — The four men who put Steve Szarewicz away for murder all changed their stories at one time or another, yet Szarewicz still sits behind bars. That's where he has been for almost 43 years.
A jury convicted him of killing Billy Merriwether, 25, who was shot twice in the back of the head and once in the chest, his body left facedown off a country road in western Pennsylvania in 1981.
There were no fingerprints, no eyewitness testimony and no DNA evidence linking Szarewicz to the scene. The case rested on the words of four jailhouse informants who all testified that Szarewicz confessed to them, and three of the four have recanted. Another inmate told the court the fourth witness against Szarewicz fabricated his story to settle a score.
Nevertheless, a Pittsburgh jury in 1983 found the informants' testimony believable enough to convict Szarewicz, despite qualms they voiced to the judge about the lack of physical evidence.
Today the conviction is still on appeal, with Szarewicz asking the state Superior Court to reduce his life sentence to 10 to 20 years.
A national database of more than 3,400 exonerations since 1989 includes more than 200 in which jailhouse informants played a role in the wrongful convictions.
When courts reverse convictions based on informant testimony, it's usually because prosecutors made some agreement with the witness and didn't reveal it, said professor Bruce Antkowiak, a lawyer at Saint Vincent College in Latrobe, Pennsylvania, and a former defense attorney and prosecutor.
''Our court system places the issue of credibility on the altar of a jury,'' Antkowiak said.