Michael Roseboro's murder conviction was not influenced or prejudiced by jurors communicating on Facebook, prosecutors maintain.

In making their argument to the Pennsylvania Superior Court recently, prosecutors used the jurors' own words on the social networking site to support their case.

It's "actually depressing," one of the jurors, Michael Hecker, wrote to his friends during the trial, "I can't wait till I can share my thoughts on it."

By the juror's own comments, prosecutors wrote, Hecker "clearly demonstrates … that he could not discuss the facts of the case with anyone despite a desire to do so."

"There has been no allegation that one single fact, evidence or piece of information was brought before the jury which was not presented during trial and there is nothing to suggest otherwise," prosecutors argued.

The murder trial last summer in Lancaster County Court sparked tremendous public attention as prosecutors presented intimate details of Roseboro's extramarital affair and what they described as "a mountain of evidence" proving that he killed his wife, Jan.

When it was over, Roseboro, 43, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Shortly after the verdict was announced on July 30, 2009, it was learned that two of the jurors had been in contact with friends on Facebook.

Defense attorneys immediately appealed, saying jurors were influenced by outside sources, and demanded a new trial.

Prosecutors are now asking the Superior Court to dismiss Roseboro's appeal and uphold the Lancaster County Court decision.

Lancaster County District Attorney Craig Stedman and Assistant District Attorney Kelly Sekula worked on the case together and wrote the 40-page response to the state court.

In their argument, prosecutors use the jurors' own comments, as well as the dates and times those comments were posted on Facebook, to try and refute the defense attorney's claims.

The actions of one of the jurors, Nick Keene, was dismissed by prosecutors.

Keene made a negative comment about jury duty on his Facebook site.

But, prosecutors noted, Keene's comment is irrelevant because it was posted on July 6, 2009, the day before he was selected as a member of the Roseboro jury.

After jury selection was completed, the trial began with opening arguments on July 13, 2009.

Roseboro, director of his family's funeral home business in Denver, was accused of killing his wife in July 2008 in the backyard swimming pool at their Reinholds home.

Prosecutors said Roseboro was motivated by a romantic obsession with another woman, Angela Funk, and feared the financial fallout of a divorce.

 After little more than one week of testimony, on July 21, 2009, Hecker posted the comment that he was a juror on the Roseboro case.

Hecker identifying himself as a juror on the case was permissible, prosecutors wrote, especially given the length of the trial and the media attention it received.

When a friend commented that it was "awesome," Hecker responded that it was "actually depressing."

That was "an understandable sentiment," prosecutors wrote, considering the entire case was about "the murder of a mother of four."

On July 22, 2009, when Hecker posted the comment that he was "exhausted and annoyed," defense attorney Allan Sodomsky suggested the juror was already convinced of Roseboro's guilt and "was annoyed by the fact that he had to continue to serve as a juror."

But prosecutors countered that Hecker's comment was posted at 11:42 p.m.

"Certainly it is reasonable to infer that Mr. Hecker was exhausted due to the late hour," prosecutors wrote, which could have been "for a myriad of reasons unrelated to the trial and Mr. Hecker's own private business."

On July 27, 2009, Hecker wrote that he was "hoping this will be the last week of court."

To which one of his friends responded, "Fry him."

"The comment demonstrates that Mr. Hecker was not talking about the facts of the case," prosecutors wrote, "as he certainly could have told others the death penalty was not applicable.

"When weighed against the thousands of words spoken at trial, the weeks of testimony taken from a vast number of witnesses, the 706 exhibits admitted, the lengthy opening statements and closing arguments of both the commonwealth and defense, the trial court's extensive jury instructions, and the mountain of evidence against (Roseboro) followed by the jury's swift verdict," prosecutors wrote, "a passing two-word comment on a social networking site pales in comparison."

Finally, at the end of the trial, on July 30, 2009, one of Hecker's friends wrote, "just vote guilty and get it over with."

But the statement was made at 9:40 a.m., prosecutors wrote.

The jury entered the courtroom at 9:04 a.m. to receive final instructions from the judge, which was immediately followed by deliberations.

Hecker, and the other jurors, would have been sequestered, prosecutors wrote, and he would not been able see the comment until after the guilty verdict had been announced.

There is no indication when the Superior Court will rule on the matter.

jkelley@lnpnews.com