A Vernon, B.C., man who continues to claim he didn’t commit the crime he is in prison for has once again failed to get parole.
Sebastian Peter Cerra, 67, is serving a life sentence for second degree murder that started in 1999. At that time, parole eligibility was set at 20 years.
His application for full parole was denied this week, with the Parole Board of Canada claiming their duty to contribute to the protection of society would not be met if they were to grant him his request for freedom.
According to court documents, it was May 1998 when Cerra gave a Kelowna woman $40 for the purpose of purchasing drugs for them both.
“The victim entered a “drug house” where she used (his) money to purchase and consume drugs in (his) absence before returning to (him) empty handed,” the Parole Board wrote in its report.
“(Cerra) became enraged and beat and choked her until she lost consciousness. (Cerra) then left her in a body of water where she drowned.”
The woman was described as a vulnerable, homeless, street-involved person who had just had a baby 12 days prior to her death.
Cerra pleaded not guilty and was noted to “show no remorse or empathy at sentencing.” To this day he maintains his innocence.
The Innocence Project has also been involved and at his parole hearing, Cerra said that new evidence has emerged in his case. What that evidence is, however, remains to be seen.
The Parole Board of Canada said that the sentencing judge saw cause for a guilty verdict, describing the attack as savage and prolonged, and noted the high number and severity of the injuries suffered by the victim in their decision.
Among the evidence highlighted, witnesses at the trial said Cerra continued his attack even after being interrupted.
Cerra has not had a psychological assessment since 2018, the Parole Board wrote in its decision, but the psychologist at that time that he was a high risk to re-offend. They also said he got a pass on an updated assessment because “no significant changes have occurred” in his case since then.
“Based on the available information, the psychologist concluded that (Cerra) continues to present a high risk to re-offend both generally and violently. (He was) not seen as ready for parole at that time and it was recommended that any releases granted be gradual and well-planned,” the report reads.
“A previous psychological assessment from 1999, indicates that (he) met the diagnostic criteria for psychopathy. The psychologist said (he) would be an extremely challenging case in terms of treatment.”
The parole board said that Cerra’s accountability and reintegration potential are both rated “low”, and his motivation level is “medium”. and he’s not participating in a correctional plan.
Cerra told the board he is a “proud man who will not admit to an offense (he) did not commit.”
He told the board that at the beginning of his sentence his lawyer told him to keep silent about the crime and he continues to follow this advice.
That’s why he will not take programs requiring him to speak about the murder and he also has argued the Supreme Court has declared that programs are illegal.
The parole board said that Cerra has been described as superficial and evasive, with a grandiose sense of self and a tendency to minimize his past difficulties and portray himself in a positive light.
He “asserts that (he is) innocent, not evasive,” he said.
Ultimately, the parole board said, Cerra’s institutional behaviour has improved over time but he’s not addressing the risks they’re concerned he offers to the greater society.
The board said it has considered the court and police documents describing his violent and brutal murder of a vulnerable woman in its decision. While certain risk issues can be assumed from the information accepted by the court at trial, the board said the actual factors that contributed to Cerra’s violence are still unknown.
“This is primarily because (he) refuses to talk about (his) crime with those whose job it is to help (him) address the roots of (his) violence,” the board wrote.
“(Cerra) continues to maintain (his) innocence and as a proud man will not compromise (his) principles.”
Cerra is involved with the Innocence Canada program and has told the board there is new evidence that has emerged in his case and other evidence used to convict him has been refuted.
He offered to show the board these materials, however, it explained to Cerra that its role is not to decide on his “guilt or innocence but rather to assess (his) risk for conditional release.”
To get that, Cerra needs to show the board that he can follow a release plan.
In recent months, Cerra posted a website claiming new evidence proves he was wrongfully convicted of a murder he never committed.
It pointed to DNA evidence, and new witness testimony, as avenues to his eventual exoneration. The site is currently down.