By Joy Bergmann
Judge Ruth Pickholz sentenced Anya Johnston to 20 years to life in prison on Wednesday following Johnston’s second-degree murder conviction for the 2018 stabbing of her neighbor, Susan Trott. Johnston’s five years of pre-trial confinement on Rikers Island will count toward the 20-year minimum she must serve before becoming eligible for parole.
Prior to issuing her decision, the judge listened to a victim-impact statement from Eric Boscia, Trott’s longtime friend and business partner, which was read aloud by Assistant District Attorney Harrison Schweiloch.
“Sue was a born-and-raised New Yorker, and it showed through in everything she did,” Boscia wrote. “Underneath her tough exterior, Sue was probably the most generous person I knew. She would give you the shirt off her back and then go and buy you a new outfit to match. And she did even more for animals, especially dogs. She loved all animals. She wouldn’t even kill flies or spiders.”
Boscia said it was devastating to learn that Trott’s compassion may have hastened her death. “Anya, in a time of need, sought out Sue’s caring nature and a fellow lover of animals. Then, she chose to murder Sue when she offered her [Anya] comfort and help.”
Boscia urged Judge Pickholz to impose the maximum possible sentence. “She should never see the outside world again. She shows no remorse for her actions and is devoid of humanity.”
ADA Schweiloch asked for 25 years to life, recalling the “particular viciousness” of the stab wounds Johnston, now 29, inflicted on Trott, who was 70. Schweiloch said Johnston had received “the best possible care” while living with mental illness. But, “she chose to ignore doctors, lie to therapists, and stop taking medication.”
Schweiloch said Johnston stabbed Trott because, “She wanted to take a human life. It was as simple as that.” The act was a long-held dream for Johnston, he said. “She yearned to kill…she thinks of herself like Kemper and Bundy, famous serial killers,” he said. “She chose murder over medicine.”
“No one will deny the tragedy of this situation,” said Johnston’s attorney Jeremy Schneider who attempted an insanity defense at trial. “But let’s not see her as beyond redemption. Let’s not exacerbate this crisis and continue this tragedy. She was mentally ill. She should be treated, not punished.” Schneider requested the minimum sentence of 15 years to life.
Then, Anya Johnston spoke: “I am truly, truly sorry for what I did to Sue Trott. I will live with it every day. I pray for her. I hope she can find peace. I hope someday Mr. Boscia can find peace as well. Thank you.”
Looking out at Johnston’s mother, Isabel, and a dozen Johnston family friends seated in the courtroom gallery, Judge Pickholz said she believed in redemption, but that such redemption requires the good-faith cooperation of the person seeking it.
“I find her responsible for what she did,” Pickholz said, noting how Johnston managed to enter college and hold a job while seeing therapists and clinicians. When Johnston stabbed Sue Trott, “she knew what she was doing.”
“This was a very difficult case for everyone involved,” she said, adding she hoped Johnston would participate in programs available at the Bedford Hills women’s prison and receive “the psychiatric treatment she desperately needs.”
As officers escorted Johnston out, she did not look back at her mother and friends. She tucked her chin and walked away.
Subscribe to West Side Rag’s FREE email newsletter here.
20 years? How can we as a society argue that we value life with such a trivial, inconsequential sentence. And for such a brutal murder.
I think you might have missed the “to life” part of the sentence.
To life is a possibility but you know that in 15 years she’s out at 44 years old.
A Joke of a sentence.
She should have gotten life with NO parole.
No parole? That is insane. Life with a possibility of parole. She is so young.
Her victim’s life is gone forever. No excuses.
I think a better question is how you can claim to value life when you think that 20 years of it is trivial and inconsequential.
You do twenty years upstate and then say it’s trivial and inconsequential. It’s more than a quarter of the average life.
Would Johnston have been deterred even by the death penalty, much less the additional five years on the minimum the DA asked for? No.
Does her imprisonment in some way restore Trott back to her loved ones and the community ? No.
Is Johnston a danger to the community? Obviously. Hence the “to life.”
This is clearly a case in which the killer needs to be out of the community indefinitely, but stacking years on top of years is a meaningless gesture. In “regular” murder cases, given the costs of incarceration and the way human beings change over time, there is little argument for a sentence beyond 20-25 years.
Twenty years is the low number, mandatory minimum that in most cases must be served before a convict may be considered for parole.
Inmates may serve substantially more time incarcerated to point they will spend nearly if not rest of their natural life in prison. Or, they may serve slightly less than stated minimum depending upon several factors.
Anya Johnston already received credit for time served. That knocks five years off minimum time down to fifteen years. Good behaviour and other factors may reduce time further still.
Have said this before and am doing so again; purpose of criminal justice system is to do just that; dispense justice and not merely mete out punishment.
Courts must weigh out justice for victims of crimes, but also for those accused and or convicted of committing.
Justice for the victim and the family means satisfaction that a just punishment has been given to the perpetrator. Punishment is also a measure to dissuade crime. Viciously murdering someone is a lifetime of grief for the victim’s family and they are imprisoned fortherest oftheirlives. Punishment is critical and the most important component of the concept of Justice. You only have to look around with eyes wide open at the crime level in society as a result of the justice system being soft on punishing perpetrators of crimes.
Except that you look at states with toughest crime laws and the stiffest sentences — including the death penalty — and they often have the highest crime rates in the country. This woman os severely mentally ill and apparently chose to walk away from treatment. “Tougher” criminal laws would not have deterred her.
It is also entirely possible that she may need to be civilly committed after her criminal sentence is served.
Severely mentally ill, while working and going to school speaks of someone who was also “responsible” for doing the crime.
She was sentenced to 20 years to life. This means she has to serve at least 20 years before she is eligible for parole – and parole is not guaranteed.
There’s a strong chance she will serve longer than 20 years, possibly even life.
So with time served and potentially parole, she’ll end up doing a little over a decade. Do I have that right?
She never needs to see the light of day again, but for some reason we’re shy about punishing murder here.
No, you don’t. I don’t blame WSR for assuming that people understand what “to life” means and have some basic understanding of the difficulty of gaining parole in NY state, but jeez. Under this sentence, she could easily spend her entire life in prison.
Difficulty of gaining parole in NY, that’s a good one. Less than a week ago a parolee followed a woman into a Soho building and raped her. He had multiple convictions before.
Let’s face it, neither the city nor the state is interested in keeping people incarcerated for very long.
I would bet money on her doing less than 20 years.
That poor mother!
Unfortunately, this reminds me of something I’ve never forgotten. Traveling on a local train in Italy, (wooden seats), a drunk across from me said……'”Why shouldn’t I kill someone….. I’m put in jail, I don’t have to pay rent, I have a roof over my head, I’ll have food and my wine.” A frightening experience for me, to hear and something I’ll never forget. Rent free, and food and never having to worry about surviving as we all have to…… Loss of freedom is a winning proposition and a small price to pay for someone who doesn’t care about another human being.