Thursday, August 6th, 2009
(This is an unedited, draft entry)
#16 Jeffrey Leslie (LA Co. Sheriff Homicide Detective; lead detective on case; testimony incomplete)
#20 Phyllis Masey (LAX police officer, retired who took an incident report from Cameron Brown; testimony complete)
#21 Mark Lillienfeld (LA Co. Sheriff Homicide Detective; went undercover as LAX Officer; testimony complete)
I overslept this morning and decide to go downtown for the afternoon session. I originally thought that court was dark today and tomorrow because the days were blocked out on clerk Sammie Benson's calendar but I learned this morning that was later changed.
Mr. Sprocket drops me off at the Red Line Station. On the trip to the train in the White Whale Work Truck (that's an adventure in and of itself) I discuss with Mr. Sprocket the testimony of Detective Leslie, specifically that the defendant was worried about his vehicle being left in the parking lot overnight with the surfboards on top. I also mentioned that he told detectives that he did not want to be photographed by the media when they left the archery range area and got to the top of the road where all the media was located. I told him about Brown covering his face and head and ducking from the cameras. Mr. Sprocket has a grown son. With a telling look on his face, Mr. Sprocket shakes his head at the defendant's behavior on the night of his daughter's death.
I think about the interview with detectives not being tape recorded and that is nagging at me a bit. I'm hoping that I didn't miss the detective giving the reason why that didn't happen. I don't believe ALL the officers are lying when they have given their impressions about the defendant's behavior at the scene of his daughter's death. I don't believe that there was a conspiracy by every officer whom I've seen testify so far, to say the same thing: that the defendant appeared unemotional, and indifferent to his daughter's violent death. Over 90% of communication is non-verbal. There are many assessments that we can make about a person's appearance, their presence, demeanor, how they carry themselves, just by observing them. Add into that the emerging work of Dr. Paul Ekman on micro expressions that reveal an individuals true emotions and whether or not they could be lying. I'm a regular reader of a blog by a natural "truth wizard" Eyes For Lies. She is one of 50 "naturals" that Dr. Ekman's associate, Dr. Marueen O'Sullivan has identified.
I miss the 12:25 pm train. The next one is at 12:37 pm. When I get downtown, I take my usual path through the court-of-flags and down the steps to the middle of the street crosswalk on Broadway. As I'm crossing, I see DDA Jean Daly walking north on Broadway and I hail her. "Is that Jean Daly!" She turns, sees me and smiles. She waits until I get across the street and gives me a big hug. I tell her which case I'm covering and we discuss the case a bit. I explain my interest in this case. Like Spector, there were only two people there and one of them ends up dead.
Jean tells me she's got a few very quick trials coming up but nothing interesting, just typical gang related deaths. Towards the end of the Spector retrial, she told me that she got a transfer that she wanted into the DA's Hardcore Gang Division, prosecuting gang members. One of these days I will sit in on one of her trials, but at this time writing about a gang related murder is not that interesting to me.
I ask Jean what is the status of the case that AJ (DDA Alan Jackson, Assistant Head of Major Crimes Division) was handed months ago. Jean gets me up to speed. It's a very old, death penalty case that was heard by an appellate court. The appellate court upheld the jury guilty verdict, but the death sentence was overturned on appeal. That's what Alan will be trying again. The case is old, I think she said 20 + years, and he is trying to locate detectives, etc. She thinks that there is a hearing coming up in the case soon. And other interesting news, Jean tells me that Alan did another Dateline special and it should be broadcast in a few weeks. She promises to send me an email with the information soon. I will most definitely want to follow Jackson's next case because I am a huge fan of this talented prosecutor. I will have no problem stepping out of the Brown case to attend pretrial hearings or even the entire Brown trial altogether if the cases overlap. I don't expect that Jackson's case will come to trial that quickly though.
When I finally get into 107, it's 1:25 pm, and testimony has already resumed. Detective Leslie is on the stand and redirect is underway.
Hum is going over the crime scene log with the Detective. The detective states he can't say for certain if the times are accurate on the log. There is a discrepancy with when Deputy Brother's signed in. Her partner, Deputy Dermis (sp?) signed in at 3:15 pm. She signed in at 3:30 pm. And, the time Brother's signed into the crime scene is different than (her? their?) report.
Patty and Ted arrive at 1:27 pm and sit in the front row. There are some new faces sitting with the victim's mother, Sarah Key-Marer.
Hum asks if the defendant told them it was quicker to get to Lauren, easier without clothing on.
JL: No. He said he had seen it on an episode of Baywatch.
CH: The defendant stated he had taken on another hike, at Bluff Cove (sp?) the week prior?
JL: Yes. One week prior.
Hum moves onto the detective's testimony that was not in his notes, specifically about his testimony where he confronted the defendant about not mentioning Lauren's name and how they brought that to the defendant's attention, and the time where they confronted the defendant with Lauren's photo.
CH: If that's not in your notes, does that mean it didn't happen?
CH: Did you make it up?
CH: Are you lying?
JL: Absolutely not.
The incident is reflected in a supplemental report that he and Smith prepared.
CH: The defense attorney asked you why you didn't record your interview with Mr. Brown. Why was it the defendant wasn't tape recorded?
JL: Initially, we wanted to video tape our interview. Based on conversations at the archery range, I felt an audio recording wouldn't (do what we wanted, which was to show the defendant's demeanor and flat affect). At the Lomita Station, we specifically went to look for a room with equipment to do that. We learned that a room was not available to us. He conferred with his partner and they had a brief conversation about it. [...] In addition, Mr. Brown's father was in the lobby of the station demanding that the defendant be charged or released immediately.
Judge Pastor gives the jury a limiting instruction about what the detective says Brown's father said.
JL: We didn't want to risk not getting a statement from the defendant.
CH: The reason was you might lose the opportunity, and not get to speak to the defendant at all?
The witness states that he did have a tape device in the car. An old fashioned recorder type that was provided to him when he first was assigned to the detective bureau. It was about 4" by 5." It was not the small digital recording devices they have today. It would not have given them the opportunity to record the defendant serendipitously. It was never the detective's intention to just audio record the defendant.
JL: We felt it was a time sensitive issue in order to get some type of statement.
Hum goes over a question by the defense about three separate versions the defendant gave as to what happened. Detective Leslie states that there is a section of Detective smith's notes where the first and second version are written out. (There's something here, regarding a question the defense asked and my notes are not clear.) The third version the defendant gave are in Detective Leslie's notebook.
CH: When you typed your report, each of the three version are contained in the report?
CH: Do you specifically recall that there (were three versions)?
JL: Yes from what they saw and heard.
Hum now asks Leslie something about interviewing techniques and when individuals are giving specifics about a traumatic event. I believe that's what was asked.
JL: When going over two or three times, the specifics of the incidents do not change.
Hum is finished with is redirect and Harris gets up to recross.
PH: You've been through hundreds of incidents. [...] Sometimes (individuals?) they tell you that, they sometimes, tell you other info that they originally forgot?
JL: Yes. Traumatic events can cause that.
Looking over at the defendant, it appears he is either looking at the jury or is looking at Harris. I can't tell.
PH: You had six hours to find a place and call, and who (Sheriff's station) can serendipitously (tape an interview). You could have asked other stations?
JL: We could have done that.
PH: Did you get on the phone and call, and say, I want to serendipitously tape this guy?
JL: No, I did not.
PH: (Would it be) fair to say you could go to your car and get the tape recorder? It would have taken you, what, five minutes?
Harris now moves onto another area, the LAX incident and the recording device they put on Ms. Key-Marer.
PH: Other possibility, you did have Ms. Key-Marer.... [...] "It was a tape recording device that was commonly worn by people? [...] (You) didn't ask the entire Lomita Station if they had a recording device that was invisible?
Harris goes over the three different versions.
PH: The (supposed) first and second versions are (written out) on a single sheet of paper, and they could be interpreted as one continuous story?
JL: For someone who wasn't there.
PH: Isn't it possible that when you filled out your notes, that you just made a mistake?
CH: Objection! Relevance!
Harris goes over the sign in time on the incident log of Deputy Brothers. He presses the point that detectives are trained to do is get details right and times right.
I look on over at the jury and some of the jurors appear to be fidgeting. A slender tall black man wearing a nice tailored suit enters 107 and sits in the second row. He's carrying a large "PENAL CODE" book. It doesn't appear as if there is much note taking from the jury at the moment.
Harris asks questions about Brown supposedly telling the officers that Brown, "straightened out her arms and legs out." I also have a note where Detective Leslie answers a question about not recalling Captain Curcio said, that the defendant was saying, "Hurry up, Hurry up." There are a few more questions that I miss and then that's the end or recross.
Hum gets up to redirect again.
CH: While you were at the crime scene, you did not know that Lomita Station did not have a serendipitous video room available?
CH: When did you find out?
JL: When we arrived at the station and inquired.
CH: Were you trying to hide what was said by not recording?
JL: Absolutely not.
CH: Were you trying to lie about what was said?
Harris gets up to recross again. He asks Leslie about his testimony where he said he was not sure if on the archery range if they had cell phone reception or not. If I'm recalling correctly, Harris confronts the detective that the defendant made a call from Sacred Cove. Meaning, the defendant was able to call from the area.
(The problem with that, and I think Hum could have addressed this. All he would have had to do was bring up the defendant's statement in the 911 call, page nine. QUOTE:
MALE CALLER: No. I, I borrowed this phone and every time I move, it cuts off. I'm standing here and he's, he, the guy I borrowed the phone from, he went down to look.)
Hum has no more redirect at this point and Leslie is instructed that he's subject to recall.
The people call Office Phyllis Masey. Ms. Kim steps out to get the next witness. Hum asks Judge Pastor for a sidebar.
CH: While (Ms. Kim's getting the) officer, may we approach?
I note that the next witness is not in uniform. The sidebar is over quickly. Ms. Masey is an older black woman. She has very short cropped hair that has a faint reddish, almost hint of blond tint to it. I like the color on her.
The witness is sworn in and she states and spells her name: Phyllis Marie Massey. She is a former officer. She retired in 2007. When she was in uniform she was a police officer at LAX.
CH: How many years?
PMM: Twenty-seven years.
CH: Is the LAX police system a division of LAPD?
PMM: No. It is a separate entity.
Hum asks her if she was working January 17th, 2001.
PMM: (I) was working the front desk (at LAX) as a police officer.
In her position, she mostly took reports, walk in (complaints) and handled internal paperwork. On that date, Cameron Brown came into the police station to report a crime. His ex-girlfriend hand come in the night before and creamed and cursed at him.
PMM: He said she said, "I'll kill you." [...] He gave her name as Sarah Key-Marer.
CH: Did he tell you when they had stopped being girlfriend and boyfriend?
The defendant told her they had a child together but they were not married.
CH: Did he tell you her name?
PMM: I remember Sarah; don't know the last name.
CH: Would Key-Marr be accurate?
PMM: Yes, I believe so.
CH: Did the defendant tell you that the child died in his care?
Hum asks her about her report and asks her to read it to herself. The report refreshes her memory. The defendant told her that the mother called him every day, all day since the child's death. There are questions about when the defendant alleged the girlfriend said she was going to kill him.
PMM: The night before, when he got off owrk.
Hum asks her to look over the report again. When I arrived, I noted that Sarah and her supporters are sitting in a totally different spot than where they sat until this past Tuesday. They are all sitting together in the third row, next to the aisle near the door. They are two rows directly behind Patty Brown and her brother, Ted. I'm guessing (I don't have a confirmation) that she was either told to move to that spot, or the defense requested she be moved farther away from the jury.
PMM: It was approximately 7:30 pm.
The witness states that the defendant told her his ex-girlfriend said, "Cameron, why don't you talk to me? Why won't you talk to me."
PMM: He said he just ignored her.
CH: Did he say the former girlfriend tried to block him so he couldn't leave on his motorcycle [...] and that she was cursing and screaming at him? [...] When he said he was specifically leaving, he said she said, the exact words in (her) report, "I'll kill you."
PMM: He said that he feared for his life and that....
CH: Did he tell you his attorney had advised him to make this report?
PMM: Yes, he did.
CH: Did he tell you his attorney (advised him) not to speak (to her)?
PMM: Yes, he did.
(Another note that is not clear and I'm not remembering what was said. I believe my note reads the witness didn't know anything about it, the death. She wasn't involved in investigation.)
The witness got her report approved by a superior and she filed the report.
That's the end of direct. Ms. Veretsian gets up to cross the witness.
LV: I know you were looking over your report. Is that because you don't remember?
PMM: Specific details, yes.
LV: You've been an LAX officer for twenty-seven years?
PMM: LAX officer for 27 years, yes.
LV: When Mr. Brown came to the station, he told you Ms. Key-Marer, the girlfriend was the mother?
(I note here that Veretsian is almost asking the same questions on cross as direct.)
LV: That she'd been calling every day, several times a day since (the child's) death? [...] And he also described to you what happened in the parking lot?
This is the second time that Judge Pastor has to ask Veretsian to get the voices up (so the court reporter can hear her).
LV: He told you... (I miss the rest of the question).
PMM: I believe he specifically said he didn't answer her.
The witness is disagreeing with Veretsian.
PMM: The report says that.
LV: Isn't it possible that he said to her that he couldn't talk to her?
CH: Objecton Speculation!
LV: Other than what's in the report, you don't remember any specific details about (the incident)?
There is another question about the "I'll kill you" threat.
PMM: No. [...] It seems to me he said (he heard 9t) while he was driving off.
LV: And he also told you he was filing the report on his lawyer's advice?
Cross is over, redirect begins.
CH: Did he also tell you that he didn't answer the calls?
PMM: Yes, he did.
Hum asks if the defendant said by the advice of his attorney...
That's it for redirect. I see the defendant whispering with Veretsian. The next witness is called. Detective Mark Lillienfeld.
I'm surprised and estatic. I LOVED Detective Lillienfeld on the stand in the Spector trial. He was a fantastic witness. I supress an urge to get up and wave to him, to get his attention and tell him I saw him testify in Spector, lol!
Judge Pastor addresses the witness with his standard instruction and Detective Lillienfeld smiles at him.
Detective Lillienfeld is an LA County Deputy Sheriff, Homicide Division. He's been a sworn officer for 29 years. In 2001, that was his 18th year on the force, he was asked to assist Smith and Leslie in their investigation. The detectives had arranged a (set-up) meeting between the defendant and Sarah Key-Marer. The meeting was recorded via audio and video. The defendant had filed a report stating that Ms. Marer had threatened to kill him. Detective Lillienfeld reviewed a video of the meeting and the detectives asked him to do something.
Smith and Leslie wanted Lillienfeld to go "undercover" and act in the capacity as an LAX airport police officer, and act as an incident investigator. I believe Lillienfeld met with a Claudio Cruise on February 15th, 2001. He went to an office (at LAX) and met with the defendant.
CH: Who was present (at the meeting)?
ML: Another empolyee of American Airlines and Officer Cruise.
Detective Lillienfeld identifies the defendant.
Lillienfeld had a conversation with the defendant that was audio recorded.
CH: Did the defendant tell you what he did?
ML: He was a baggage handler.
CH: Did you tell him you were there to investigate the incident?
ML: (Yes sir.)
He was afraid the contact with the ex-girlfriend would continue and he wanted them to stop (it?). The defendant tells Lillienfeld that the girlfriend, she was using (foul?) language. (He said she said,) You can't just live your life and can't talk to me. She supposedly prevented him from leaving.
CH: How close did the defendant say she was to him?
ML: She was close enough to smell what he described as her bad breath.
PH: Objection! Approach!
I observe that Patty's notepad is on the ledge of the well wall. Ted is leaning forward on the ledge. His elbow is on the ledge. The defendant is leaning back in his chair. I can hear that Judge Pastor is speaking; now Harris. Veretsian leaves the courtroom for a moment.
After the sidebar, the question about bad breath is asked again.
CH: At one point, was the transcript (of the audio recording) inaccurate in one section?
ML: It was at one point.
The witness specifically remembered the defendant saying that. The defendant claimed that Ms. Key-Marer said, I should kill you, or Maybe I should kill you and she repeated the phrase several times.
ML: He said that he tried to wave to some LAX officers that he saw in the parking garage. He said doing that, distracted Ms. Key-Mar for a moment and that me it so he could drive away.
One of the reasons he gave for not speaking to her was his lawyer. As a result of him talking with her, that she could make false statements that he confessed to her. Hum asks the witness several other questions about the defendant's claims about Ms. Key-Mar.
CH: The third time during the interview, where he claimed Ms.Key-Marer said, I'll kill you...
ML: He thought that Ms. Key-Marer was going to strike him or hit him, so he stated he held hs ground.
CH: Did the defendant give some background?
ML: He stated he was unaware that she was pregnant when they broke up.
CH: Did he specifically tell you that when he and Sarah broke up....
ML: He said he didn't know. [...] He said that Sarah's roommate told him that she was from England and that she was trying (to get pregnant?).
CH: Did the defendant tell you his wife's name?
CH: Did he tell you her age?
ML: At the time inf 2001, she was 48 years old.
The defendant also told the undercover detective that they were married eleven or twelve months [...] and that she was currently unemployed. [...] (That) she was a civil engineer.
CH: Did you ask him why he had obtained an attorney?
ML: He stated the sheriff had obtained a search warrant at his home, his boar and seized his computer and he felt he needed a lawyer after that.
There's also something about the defendant stated that he was present at Lomita Station when they had (?)... The defendant told Lillienfeld that his father was retired from the cable and TV business and did a lot of work on the computer. (El Portal?) He gave the detective his father's business card.
CH: Did he ever tell you his father worked for the CIA?
Lillenfeld testifies he asked the defendant to write out a very brief statement of what occured in the parking lot. The hand written statement by Brown is put up on the overhead screen.
This is People's #46, dated 4-3-01.
Name is Cameron Brown. On January 18th, 2001 at 7L30 pm a former girlfriend, Sarah Key-Mar confronted me in a parking lot at LAX my place of work. She threatened me and said, "I'll kill you." I want this case prosecuted.
The exhibit is signed Cameron Brown and dated 4-3-01.
I believe Hum asks for a sidebar. Afterwords, Pastor asks Juror #9 if he would like to look at the actual exhibit. It's handed to juror #9 then returned to Hum. (Juror #9 is the juror who has trouble seeing exhibits up on the overhead screen.)
On May 2nd, 2001, Detective Lillienfeld received a phone call form the defendant. There were two things. He was movin and had a new address and phone number in Camarillo. The defendant also stated he had been served (with a subpoena?) for Lauren's death. He wanted to know how the case was going.
2:33 pm: The afternoon break is called. I'm sort of remembering that Harris asked or signaled the Judge for a break because the defendant needed to use the restroom. Ted and Harris leave the courtroom and Patty follows them. Sarah gets up to speak to Detective Leslie. I still have that urge to go up to Detective Lillienfeld and tell him how much I enjoyed watching him testify in Spector. I successfully restrain myself.
At the break, the bailiff's phone goes off. Ms. Benson gets up from her desk and goes over to the black gentleman and gives him a hug. Sarah and Ms. Kim whisper. I'm still wondering about the new location that Sarah and her friends are sitting in. Where she is now, she's actually easier to be seen by the jury. Where she was sitting before, (either beside me or in the row in back of me on the far right of the courtroom) the jury would have had to have taken their eyes off of the witness on the stand and glance 180 degrees the other direction to see her.
During the break, Judge Pastor asks Lillienfeld about the pronunciation of his name. (LIL-en-feld) The second "i" is silent. Lillienfeld replies, "You'd have to ask someone from Russia." I find this very humorous because during the very first Spector trial, there was this exact came discussion in the gallery among the accredited press.
After the break, Harris gets up to cross the witness.
PH: The first interview lasted how long?
ML: Thirty minutes.
Harris asks if there were a number of questions he asked Brown "from exes to surfing?"
ML: Yes sir.
PH: You knew they were investigating a homicide?
(I think this was a terrible question by Harris and could be interpreted as a defense slip up, or admission. During the entire Spector trial, defense attorney Doron Weinberg objected every time he could to the prosecution's characterization, that a "homicide" or a "murder" (Lana's death) had occurred. To me, in my opinion, this is a big mistake by Harris.)
ML: It's one of the reasons to ask (Brown) about the case.
PH: You were goading him?
ML: You used that word. I was trying to elicit statements that goes to guilt.
PH: But he never said anything negative about Ms. Key-Marer (did he)? [...] You continued (to fit) your questions about derogatory statements (about relationships with women)?
ML: It just seemed to turn him off and he wasn't buying what I was selling.
Harris goes over the transcript of his interview with Brown.
PH: You asked him questions about his wife, and he couldn't remember his wife's birthday and you teased him about that? [...] But he remembered Lauren's birthday (didn't he)?
Harris continues to go over more of the interview.
PH: He said, "I'd like to tell her what happened but I can't" ?
PH: He told you that, right away, that at the sheriff's station they didn't believe him?
ML: Yes sir.
PH: Cameron Brown told you about the custody issues?
ML: Yes sir.
PH: He told you that he was being assisted by a fascillitator?
ML: Yes sir.
I believe Harris asks him if he knew what a court facillitator was and Lillienfeld states that he did.
PH: He told you his motorcycle was really loud; the BSA, and it went "thump, thump, thump," and that many people could have (heard/seen the exchange)?
ML: Yes, that's correct.
PH: He told you about taking his daughter to the beach and collecting shells? [...] He told you that he took her to (the) Bluffs to throw rocks? [...] He told you that she wasn't afraid?
(I think Harris is testifying here.) Harris asks about Brown's tone of voice (during the interview).
ML: There wasn't anything remarkable (about it).
PH: He told you about how he would joke aobut with his buddies, how she wasn't afraid of anythng and she would be a surfer?
Regarding the phone calls he received from Sarah.
PH: He told you she wouldn't say anything, no threats over the phone; she wouldn't say anything, just cry?
That's it for cross. Hum gets up to redirect.
Hum asks the witness questions abou the threat and the order in which the defendant told him about the threat. Now he has Lillienfeld go over a transcript of the interview. The defendant did provide Lillienfelt the sequence of events of what Sarah Key-Marer said.
After those questions, Harris recrosses the witness.
Harris get's the witness to clarify that Brown told him the threats happened "as he was leaving," as he said before, "...that she said that as he was leaving."
That's it for this witness and Lillienfeld is excused. Detective Leslie is recalled to the stand.
Detective Leslie states the detectives arranged, (set-up) a meeting between Sarah Key-Marer and the defendant at LAX International Airport. There was undercover surveilance on the defendant in and around the time he was going to get off work. Recording facilities were set up in the area where his motorcycle was (parking structure). There was an undercover van that had a camera that video taped the entire exchange between Ms. Key-Marer and the defendant.
They received word from the undercover detectives the defendant was off work. Ms. Key-Marer was given instructions to approach the witness. Detective Leslie was in the van where the video equipment and listening equipment was located. He could hear what was going on. Ms. Key-Marer had on her person, a device to pick up the sound (conversation).
The people submit a DVD, People's #47 and a transcript, People's #48. Transcripts are passed to the jurors and Judge Pastor informs them that the DVID is the evidence, not the transcript.
The video is played for the jurors on the overhead screen. The taping started at 20:30.42 minutes on 1-18-01.
Sarah Key-Marer approaches the defendant as he's getting on his motorcycle.
I did write down some of the dialog, but since I've recently obtained a transcript of the video, I will just put that up as a separate entry. On the video, a few things stood out. Ms. Marer at no time blocked the defendant's motorcycle from leaving. Although at times she yelled at Brown, demanding that he tell her what happened, not once did she curse at him or physically threaten him. Ms. Marer never threatened the defendant with the statement "I'll kill you." She just stood off to the side of his motorcycle and demanded that he speak to her, to answer her questions. It did not appear to me that she got so close to him that he could smell her breath. He had his helmet on for most of the confrontation. Towards the end of the video, Brown starts to make, waving, circling type motions with his right hand, as if he is trying to signal someone. Not long after that, he just leaves the parking lot.
After the video is finished Hum asks Leslie a few questions.
CH: Did Ms. Key-Marer say, "Ill kill you?"
CH: Did she say, "I should kill you?"
CH: Did she say, "Maybe I'll kill you?"
CH: Did she say anything related to killing?
CH: Could you hear what was the last thing Ms. Key-Marer said?
CH: What was the last thing she said?
JL: Cameron, Cameron.
There's no more cross by counsel and Judge Pastor asks to see counsel for sidebar.
There's a stipulation that is presented to the jury that all parties agreed to. Judge Pastor explains to the jurors that a stipulation is about facts that are not in dispute by either party. The stipulation is that the attorney the defendant referred to are not affilliated in any way with the current counsel. Court ends early for the day, ahead of schedule. Judge Pastor orders the jury back tomorrow at 9:00 am.
Judge Pastor asks counsel if there are any evidentiary issues regarding any upcoming witnesses. Hum doesn't think so. Harris says he doesn't know who's up for tomorrow. Hum asks the judge to chat informally with Harris. Pastor grants this request.
Hum states that if there is anyone at the last minute, he will provide the defense with the names tomorrow.
JP: Do any witnesses raise 402 issues?
PH: Yes. A (prior) girlfriend will testify; going to raise behavior issues. Two incidents on 1101(b).
Harris names the witness he has an issue with, Jane Doe. (I will be calling this witness Jane Doe which is not her real name. The explanation for that will come on Day 10's entry.) Harris wants to object to the fact taht Brown was arrested (for one of the incidents). Harris wants a 402 hearing tomorrow at 8:30 am. Pastor wants it now, since they have the court time.
I don't have in my notes who presents the information on what the witness will testify to. I believe it's Hum.
Jane Doe and the defendant were girlfriend and boyfriend. She became pregnant. They discussed abortion. They discussed the issue and it was a mutual agreement to have the abortion, and that there were incidents. She wanted to date others and he became jealous. He broke into her apartment. He ransacked the apartment.
The time frame is mid to late 1980's, not 100% certain. There was a car ramming incident. Hum states it goes to "common plan and scheme."
Harris states that he thought Hum was not going to bring in activities that led to the arrest.
The car ramming incident was July 4th, 1986. They dated for about 1/2 a year. Hum wanted to bring in the fact that it was reported to the police.
PH: Sorry, that was Mr. Hum's impression but that was not the impression (I had). I did not "not object." I believe I said, "Bring it up before the appropriate time."
I believe Hum states that Jane Doe will be later in the morning or later in the afternoon. Judge Pastor tells counsel to meet at 8:30 am to discuss this. Hum states that the defendant admitted to her he did it (break in, ram her car) because his parents were the ones that paid for the damage to her car.
And that's it. Court is in recess.