Wednesday, May 15, 2013

Kelly Soo Park, Day 3 Pretrial Motions & Opening Statements

Kelly Soo Park with counsel, Jul 2012

UPDATE 6/7 This entry was edited to place the postings in chronological order for easier reading. Sprocket.

UPDATE 9:00 PM editing, clarity
6:00 AM PT
Opening statements are set to begin today in the murder trial of Kelly Soo Park sometime after 10:00 AM.  There are several outstanding motions filed by the defense that need to be ruled on before the jury can be sworn into service.  Those are set to be argued at 9:00 AM.  After opening statements begin, please be forewarned I will not be able to update as often as in pretrial hearings, but I will have an update at breaks and late in the evening.  If you have any questions, please leave me a comment or email and I will try to answer them by the end of the day.

6:55 AM PT
The older blonde woman sitting at the defense table for two days of jury selection was Lee Meihls, a jury consultant.  At this time, I do not believe the prosecution used a jury consultant Phil Spector's defense team as well as the prosecution in both trials used jury consultants.

8:12 AM
More supporters of Juliana Redding arrive on the 9th floor.

8:10 AM
The security station on the 9th floor opened a bit late this morning.  Usually it's open at 8AM sharp.  Members of the Park's family and supporters as well as the victim, Juliana Redding were waiting on the 9th floor for the security station to open.  Patricia and Greg Redding have not yet arrived.  NBC Dateline and CBS 48 Hours are here with a camera crew to video tape opening statements.  The Los Angeles Times has an article about the case online this morning.  I have not seen a writer from the times in the courtroom since I've covered the case.

8:19 AM
More friends and family of Juliana Redding arrive, smiling and exchange hugs with the people who are already here.  Sitting on the benches to my right are members of Park's support group.

8:23 AM
Lisa Tomaselli from ABC 20/20 arrives and says hello and Jack Leonard from the LA Times is here. I've sat through the Robert Blake trial with Andrew Blankstein from the Times, but this will be the first with Leonard.

8:56 AM
Patricia and Greg Redding enter the court room with two other supporters, Det. Thompson and DDA Okun-Wiese and their clerk.

8:59 AM PIO Cathy arrives with some last minute supporters for Juliana.  Kelly Soo Park and Chronister entered the courtroom a few minutes after Juliana’s parents.  Kelly gave a big hug to a female family member who has been here for her at every pretrial hearing I’ve covered.  A hearing in another case is about to get underway.  The courtroom is packed, all except the front row with family on both sides of the case.  The press is sitting in the back row by the door.  There is a camera crew in the back right corner of the courtroom to film opening statements.
9:05 AM
Judge Kennedy takes the bench for a hearing in another case.  There are four in custody defendants in the case.

I see Miriam Hernandez from local ABC 7 in the hallway.  The courtroom is packed and I don’t know where she will be able to have a seat. Cathy from the PIO directs her and another woman to the back row.

9:16 AM
The other case hearing is going long, with excuses on both sides of the table.

9:18 AM
Earlier, I had recognized a familiar face from the Spector trial.  It’s a reporter, Linda from CNN who reintroduced herself to me. 

9:19 AM
Judge: Are we ready on Park?

More reporters from the networks arrive at the last minute.

On the record with Park.

JK: Let’s talk about first, the judicial immunity motion filed by the defense and apposed by the prosecution.

GB: Position is simple. We have a witness,that the court is aware, that we think is exculpatory testimony hence, that's a plea the defense is entitled to make. I realize there is some question in the law, as to whether or not the court can compel (the prosecution to grant) immunity.  The question is, the people’s unwillingness to solve this problem in court.  Don’t think the prosecution should be able to go through (to trial?), when there is a witness that is critical to the defense, and we’re going ahead. And the reason, that witness is under prosecution, under a year old case.

Buehler feels they should be able to ask questions of a critical witness (for their case), who has taken the fifth.  Buehler, feels the court has the

People:  Goes over what happened last week in trial. 
People v Cook. No other court, in US and Calif. had granted relief for a third party witness.  Use immunity, should be granted under very limited (instances). There are rules for that to even happen.

Prosecution argues that the defense had not met it’s burden to present this witness.  For the people to grant Ms. Ayala to testify, when the people don’t believe her at all.

She not only has the current pending case, but she also has an arrest against Mr. Schwarcz, for domestic violence.  People are not willing to grant Ms. Ayala immunity.

JK: It is true there is no Calif case hat I could find that had the court ranting immunity to a 3rd party witness. Because of the separation of powers, the issues of whether the prosecution grants immunity, is for them and I don’t think I have the power to grant immunity.

With regards to the supposed statements of Ms . Ayala, they seem to me to be, ambiguous at best. You say they are exculpatory, but I don’t see where they are exculpatory.  She makes some statement alleged by John Gilmore, that’s not saying he’s committed the murder of Juliana Redding, it was well after the murder of Ms. Redding and everyone by that time knew the cause of death. I don’t se where that is an unambiguous statement that implicates John Gilmore in the murder of Juliana Redding.

The whole saga between Gilmore, Ayala, Schwarcz, she details them, etc., back and forth between the two men. This would be a can of worms that would be a HUGE diversion from the issues of this case. Would involve any number of witnesses, and as I see it, granting a further issue of immunity. If accusation would be made against John Gilmore, and if John Gilmore is called as a witness, he would have a fifth amendment right against self incrimination. We have another issue whether he should be granted immunity.  Would be far more prejudicial than probative. It would be a mini trial that would be as long as this trial.

The standards, set forth in the cases, I don’t think the defense has established the prongs necessary for the court to grant immunity, and I don’t think I have the ability to order the prosecution to grant immunity. So the issue of granting immunity to ms Ayala is denied.

Issue with regard to the recording and transcript of the recording and for the record. It was Friday of last week that Mr. Stechman (sp?) testified, and the tape was played in court, and I had listened to the enhanced version of the tape.

SOW: The people provided the court with the first copy of the recording. 

People go over what happened on Friday.  Under 352 it should be excluded. Under Polk, the unintelligible portions were not transcribed. 

There’s nothing intelligible in that recording.

GB: I agree with your honor’s testimony last week, that the jury should be able to determine what they hear, on that tape.  Troubled by that every motion in this case, that their evidence is so strong, our evidence shouldn’t be tested.

Judge Kennedy challenged Buehler as to what statements were presented last week as to what John Gilmore allegedly said.

JK: I would not admit that evidence (tape) only if it’s relevant in some way.  

The witness said, not only what, this is what he heard, and people in his office heard it and that when I heard it, I would hear the same thing. I did not hear it.  The people are not challenging the methodology. However, I do not believe, he would be entitled to say, what he feels the tape says. And this “quote, critical listening,” I’ve never seen a case where someone was allowed to testify as a “critical listener.”   .... if the tape is relevant and we can deal with relevance at some other point, it could come in, and he could tell what he said to enhance it, but I would not allow him to testify as to what he said.

Next issue, is 1101 B evidence, defense motion.

More people enter the courtroom.

Defense argues their believe that they can put 1101 B witnesses on trial.  We do have this history, of jealousy, violence and outbursts, by Mr. Gilmore, and I think it’s clear (under case?) when we have prior acts of violence, then that is relevant to show motive and to show identity.  I think this reads into the overall law in people v. Hall.

Judge Kennedy asks if there is any evidence of physical violence of Gilmore against Redding.  Buehler says, not against her person, but against property.  Buehler stresses that these incidents are close in time (to the murder).  We have a pattern, in the week, before the murder.  Buehler mentions there were things that happened, within the week. There were text messages. Ms. Redding was with two other people (within that week?).

I think, that circumstantial evidence, that he was involved in the actual crime in the case, I think that’s evidence that we are entitled to put on. If the court won’t let us do that, I think we’ve pass the point, of Holmes v. South Carolina. The jury should be able to hear that evidence.

People: Both sides have to comply with the rules of evidence.  Okun-Wiese argues why the cases that Buehler cites don’t come near what happened in this case.  ... As the court pointed out, ... Mr. Gilmore never laid a hand on Ms. Redding. 

The defense has not shown a nexus between the event and the evidence.

JK: In my review of the case law of the review of the papers that were cited by both sides, it seems to me that ...the defense has failed to show the nexus. ... Mere opportunity, or motive is not enough to establish a nexus.

The defense still has not provided any evidence that Mr. Gilmore could have committed the crime. There is no other substantiating evidence. No hair, fingerprints, DNA, clothing.  In the absence of some kind of connecting evidence, you have not met the burden. ... They’re incidences that are not physical evidence of violence against Ms. Redding. He may punch a hole in the wall or hit her car.. but it’s not evidence that he physically abused her or choked her or hit her. It’s not anything compared to the night of her death. I don’t make up the law.  Mere motive or opportunity is not sufficient.  With out additional evidence, it doesn’t meet the burden.

I people has the burden to prove Ms. Park committed the crime. So I don’t think her due process rights have been denied.

Motion to have the case continued until Ms. Ayala’s case is concluded is denied.  Maybe Ms. Ayala will testify, maybe she won’t. But this case will not be delayed to see what happens in that case.

Other defense motions, to have the defense investigator testify to what Ayala told her is denied. 

10:12 AM Court back in session. Let me just make it clear, that the media people are not allowed to show any jurors at any time. Any violation of that, and that will be the end of that.

Bailiff: Please turn your cell phones off!

Jury walks in. The first row is empty and that’s where the jurors walk, instead of through the well, to enter the jury box.

Jurors are asked to stand, face the clerk and raise their right hand. The jurors are sworn in.   Now four alternates stand, and take their oath that is read by the court clerk.

The court explains what will happen from now forward.  Assures the jury that the members of the jury and alternates will not be shown on camera.  Explains that they will only be for certain parts of the trial.  Tells the jury they need to avoid the news and Internet coverage.

Court reads from a preset explanation as to what will happen next.  Explains basic laws and procedure. Directs them in jury instructions. Instructs them to not talk about the case to other jurors, family, spiritual advisers. Do not do any research on their own. Do not use a dictionary or any other source for information.  Keep your cell phone turned off while in the courtroom, and in the jury room.  Do not speak to any party, witness, attorney in this case.  If you receive any information about this case from an outside source, ... you must immediately tell the bailiff.

In the gallery are several people from the DA’s office. I recognize some faces I’ve seen in arraignment court.  Also here is the lovely Deborah Brazil, who prosecuted Conrad Murray along with former prosecutor David Walgren.

The second and third row are packed with family on both sides.  The back row is filled with media.  The left side behind the bailiff’s desk is filled with court and DA staff and I believe a defense clerk.

10:29 AM
The jury instructions continue to be read to the jury as to what will be presented to them.  It’s a long set of instructions about what they can consider, in evaluating evidence and witness testimony.

The jury appears very attentive to the judge.

Prosecution Opening Statement
10:31 AM
Ms. Wiese gets up to present her opening statement.

Juliana Redding spent the last moments of her life, trying to save it.  She tried to fight off a woman, a woman she didn’t know. A woman who cut off her last breath of air.  A woman who needs to be held accountable for ...

Defendant. is charged with one count 187, of felony murder.  Explains felony murder to the jury.  Explains that there are two elements that she must prove over the case, malice aforethought.  You will be presented with witnesses, several items of evidence, cell phone records.  It will be through the presentation of this evidence that what happened on March 15th ... that will prove the defendant is guilty.

Photo taken of Juliana on March 15th on the screen.  On that day, she went with a friend to a restaurant, Tengu in Santa Monica.  Then they parted ways.  (Juliana went home to) 1527 Centinela, Apt A. 

You will learn, that approximately 9:52 PM, 911 was dialed from her cell phone, but the call didn’t go through.  At 9:53 PM, that neighbor heard yelling, and a commotion, and she knew the time because she checked the time on her cable box.

On March 16th, her mother had not heard from Juliana, and she called the Santa Monica police department to check on her, and they did. They went to check on her. The front door was locked. The windows were locked and the back door was locked.

Because the officer could not get in, he called for an officer that he knew was trained in picking locks.  They got in through the window in the door and by picking the lock of the back door. 

When they entered, they smelled gas. The fire department responded.  When fire department entered the location they also smelled gas.  There was the right stove knob that was turned to the right.

Officers initially entered through the kitchen.  On the front door, the front door was locked and deadbolt was also locked.  They saw evidence of a struggle in the living room.  Wiese details the evidence that was found in the living room.

There was one of the pillow cushions, the cover had been taken off. The lamp was unplugged, and the computer was unplugged from the wall, sitting on the couch. There was a lit candle, in this room.  You will hear a firefighter testify that along with the gas and a lit candle, an explosion could have happened.

Photos of Juliana are up on the screen. In the gallery, when the photos of Juliana's lifeless body are put on the overhead screen, Patricia Redding starts to sob uncontrollably.

Wiese details the people who showed up to investigate the crime. Outlines the items that were collected and that the criminalists took hundreds of photographs.  They took DNA swabs.  They took fingerprints. One fingerprint was lifted from a plate in the sink.  Items were sent to determine if DNA could be lifted.  Numerous items were sent to see if DNA could be a match.

Photos of Juliana on the screen, her face. She's lying on her back on her bed. Her left arm is over her head on the bed in the photo.

There was DNA extracted from six items. Cell phone, Juliana's neck, her tank top, the right knob of the stove, the interior door knob and a lifted fingerprint.

The DNA was a combination of two people, a major and minor contributor. One was Juliana, the other was from a female. There was blood attached to the fingerprint, that sourced to a female, a single source.  That DNA matched to the other six items.

Several reference samples were taken from different subjects. Up on the screen we see an image, 42 women were eliminated.  All were submitted to determine who’s profile this was.  All people close to her were eliminated.

Detectives saw that Juliana worked for Dr. Munir Uwaydah, (and dated him) who she introduced to her father, Greg Redding.  Prosecution sets up the relationship between Uwaydah and Greg Redding.

Greg started checking into Uwaydah, and found out he was married, had kids and that he had lied about his true age. He told his daughter.  Juliana gets into an argument with Uwaydah and breaks off with him. Greg Redding is going through contract negotiations with Uwaydah. When he learns certain things, he decides to break off the business negotiations.

Det. Thompson learns about Uwaydah, and starts to look at women associated with Uwaydah. Looks at women who worked for him. She obtains five DNA samples. All of those are eliminated, except for one, the defendant.  A sample was obtained from cigarettes, that matched all the DNA recovered from the scene.  The defendant was arrested on June 18th, 2010 and her fingerprints taken. There was a match to the fingerprint lifted from Juliana’s apartment. It was a match.

That is the evidence in the case, in a nutshell. At this point, the only thing that I can ask you to do is listen to all the evidence in this case. (Later, I will ask you to listen to closing arguments and find the defendant guilty.) End prosecutions opening statement.

Defense Opening Statement
Buehler, I’m not going to tell you anything that I think the evidence will show; that the forensic evidence, the DNA evidence, is not conclusive.  There’s no way to tell you when that evidence got there. Kelly Soo Park had no (reason?) to kill Juliana Redding. All I ask is that you keep an open mind to the evidence. Buehler spoke for two minutes max.

The people call their first witness.
1. Greg  Redding

Father of the victim.  Photo on the screen, his daughter.  Redding also has a son. He spoke to her almost every day.  The last time he spoke to her was February 15th.  Last time he saw her was in the middle of February, 2008. We would communicate every day. He then corrects that. He spoke to her daily.

Last time he saw her alive was in February 2008 when he was visiting LA.  When he saw her, she was living in the house on Centinela. She did not have any room mates.  Juliana lived in Arizona for most of her adult life. She came to California to go to college.  She move to Calif. in 2005.

He knows Munir Uwaydah.  Photo on screen.  Identifies Uwaydah. He met him through his daughter.  "Juliana told me she met this man." She told him that her father was a pharmacist. Sometime after that, Uwaydah was interested in hiring a pharmacist.

When he first learned about Uwaydah he assumed that Juliana was seeing him in some capacity. He periodically come out to see Juliana, and he did meet Dr. Uwaydah, to see him about a potential job offer.  It was early August 2007 he went out there and met him.

The first time, his daughter used to go this pet shop, and they would have a “yappy hour.” It was a social gathering and that’s where he first met him.  Stayed at the event for about 40 minutes.  They met to discuss this pharmacy position. He knew that Uwaydah was a practicing physician, an orthopedic surgeon.

It was a pharmacy that Uwaydah told him about that was separate from his private practice.

They went to a restaurant with Natasha Nobi, (sp?) a friend of Juliana (and?) Dr. Uwaydah.  Talked during dinner about the job, getting information.  Met the following day, Sunday. The position was, he would run the pharmacy operation which entailed all aspect of the pharmacy.  He would have to get licensed in California. He would have to study for the state boards in CA. He did that and took the exam. He became licensed in Calif.

When he left Uwaydah the next day, did you have an agreement? No.  Just talked about it with his daughter.  I think at the time he had offered her some type of position with one of his medical offices.

He eventually came back to Calif to meet with Uwaydah, probably three or four more times after the initial visit. The way he understood, he would fill prescriptions and they would be distributed to various medical outlets. He would also be compounding this specialized pain cream.

Describes how when he first met Uwaydah, he came up and shook his hand and said, I want to offer you a job at $180,00 a year.  That offer continued to change until it reached a level that Redding was comfortable with.  Explains the contract structure.

Redding considered the cost of living in Calif vs. Arizona, and negotiated a salary through his attorney of an additional bonus structure from the compounding of the pain cream.  An amount of $400,000.  It was a product that had already been developed and compounded for.  This was for Golden State Pharmacy.  He went to that location, maybe three times. 

"The pharmacy was in existence, but the first time I saw it, it didn’t look like there were any employees in there at the time."  Describes the set up.  Uwaydah had brought up to him about another business behind the scenes that could be expanded to that back warehouse.  That was another business, he described as the Bubble Bakery, that manufactured soaps.

Was that business under Dr. Uwaydah’s name? 
It wasn’t in his name.


Negotiations with Uwaydah went through until March, 2008.  It was a pharmacy, but not a typical pharmacy like Walgrens, Rite Aid, it was more a private pharmacy, for the medical practice of Uwaydah’s private patients.

Back to Juliana, did she ever live at a house owned by Uwaydah?

Juliana and a friend briefly did, with Stephanie.  He thinks Juliana lived there a couple of weeks. Thinks the house is in Beverly Hills.  Thinks it was around, October 2007.  Juliana’s birthday 10/25/86.  She was not living there after her birthday, but before.

Juliana and Dr. Uwaydah were not friendly throughout the entire business negotiations.  His wife and him talked about the things they found out about Uwaydah. It was the day Juliana was going on a trip with friends to Las Vegas to celebrate her birthday.  He told her what he had found out about Uwaydah just before she left.

He had been doing online searches of Uwaydah, paying to find out information, web sites were in a different languages.  At the last minute he found out Uwaydah was married, his age wasn’t what he said it was, he had children.

Juliana was getting her hair fixed at a salon getting ready to celebrate her birthday in Las Vegas. They had found out all this information, within a day of her leaving, because they were concerned for her safety.  They called her and told her what they had discovered.

Juliana and friends flew to Vegas on one of Uwaydah’s jets.  When she returned, she moved out of Uwaydah’s Beverly Hills home.  He did not immediately re-continue the negotiations with Dr. Uwaydah.   There was a big argument at the restaurant in Vegas. 

After Juliana came back, he didn’t immediately speak to Uwaydah.  They did not answer the phone.  Later, he restarted his negotiations with Uwaydah about the position.  Several weeks, or a month later, restarted negotiations.  It was sometime far after the whole incident occurred.

I was waiting for Juliana to explain, why she was upset because we had no idea.  Eventually Uwaydah called Redding.  I thought he was basically a fraud. He had lied about so many things.  Uwaydah said all that (what Redding had found out about him) was lies, it was basically yellow journalism.  Uwaydah tried to vindicate himself, and that everything was on the up and up.    Uwaydah gave him documents that made it appear that everything was on the up and up.  I felt like, with the information he gave me, maybe he was on the up and up.

He brought it up to Juliana, and that maybe he was wrong. And that maybe he made a mistake. Maybe I was foolish. Maybe I had wrongly accused him at the time.  Uwaydah did not rekindle the relationship with Juliana.

Started renegotiation's with Uwaydah in November or December 2007, and that continued all the way through March, 2008. Greg Redding’s sister briefly worked for Uwaydah.

After that one investigation, he didn’t do any further investigation of Uwaydah.  When he started looking at the work that he was really going to be doing, he found there were not the proper licenses for what he was going to be doing.

Outside of his pharmacist license, there isn’t a business license to compound, but when you go from certain quantities, you go from compounding to manufacturing. That needs a license. There was never an exact amount mentioned in the contract.  There wasn’t a number of so many units that would be prepared.  In order to do that, there had to be a license the pharmacy needed to hold.  He doesn’t recall that the pharmacy had that.

If there was a violation, as a pharmacist, he would be responsible for everything in the pharmacy. He would have been on the hook.  He felt the pharmacy wasn’t ready to do that type of work. He didn’t feel comfortable. He had an attorney who was advising him.  Discussed his concerns with his attorney.

Discussed his uncomfortableness, more towards the end of February, right when he passed all his exams.  That brought everything to a culmination and he had to make a decision as to whether he was going to go through with the job.

Uwaydah called him at home, because there were things in the contract that Uwaydah did not like.  He was angry with Redding.  The negotiations break down. Redding's attorney gave him some advice, and sent a letter to Uwaydah’s attorney at the time.  Sometime after that, Uwaydah’s attorney withdrew the job offer. Redding claims that he made the conscious decision before the job was recinded not to go through with the contract.
People introduce a letter from Redding’s attorney to Uwaydah’s attorney Steven H. Gardner, withdrawing from the contract. Letter dated March 10th, 2008.

He learned at some point that his daughter had been killed. He just came back from running. His wife told him, “Juliana’s missing! Juliana’s missing!” Late that night, he had contact with a police detective.  He got a call from John, the boyfriend, who was screaming, “She’s dead! She’s dead.”

Juliana was his only daughter.   Redding starts to break up and cry on the stand.  He pauses before continuing.  Juliana had a traffic citation in December 2007.  She got that ticket driving a Range Rover or Land Cruiser.  She didn’t own one.  He believes that the vehicle belonged to Uwaydah.  There was no insurance certificate in the car so she got a ticket.  She tried to get proof of insurance from Uwaydah, but she was broken up with him. 

When the negotiations were continuing, one of things he asked of Uwaydah, was for him to give Juliana proof of insurance so she didn’t have to pay for the ticket.  Redding was sent an email, with the proof of insurance. He sent that to Juliana.  That document was emailed to him. Document is up on the screen. 

End of Direct.

Buehler begins cross.

Asks about the negotiations with Uwaydah in November.  Saw Uwaydah a couple times, during that time. They were on friendly terms. Redding was interested in working for him, yes.  Yes, Uwaydah, treated him well. It was going to be a big move for his family. There was a lot at stake. 

Was there an issue with something having to do with making an airplane available to you?


Uwaydah was supposed to make a plane available.  Redding feels, that was an issue with Uwaydah, what he was unhappy about.  It was part of his rebuttal in his contract through his lawyer.   This was one of the issues that Uwaydah was upset about, that Redding’s attorney had put in the contract. “He seemed to be upset about that.” It appeared to be a breaking point with Uwaydah. That was the last conversation he had with Uwaydah.

Redding mentioned about having some concerns, about the appropriate licensing to be made for manufacturing the cream. The never resolved the issues.  Uwaydah being a physician, he didn’t have any say in the pharmacy. Rules and regulations in California (preclude Uwaydah from owning a pharmacy).

Buehler asks more questions about making the cream and compounding it. Redding doesn’t know who was the owner of the formula. 


He got a call from a Uwaydah employee, after his last conversation, with Uwaydah, from Marissa Hornbeck (sp?), demanding that he answer the phone. He never answered the phone.  He knew that she was employed by Uwaydah because Uwaydah spoke about her.

Previously, Uwaydah picked Redding up in Arizone in this small plane on three occasions, and flew Redding back to Uwaydah. Uwaydah told Redding that he had another jet that he used. Redding states Uwaydah offered the plane to him to travel back and forth, until he moved out to California.

"The whole thing sounds ridiculous anyway." Uwaydah said he had his own jet, another plane and Redding could use this small plane.  Because he made this offer to him, Redding made his attorney put it in the contract. Redding said whenever Uwaydah ever made an offer, he had his attorney put it in the contract.

"When you said that Uwaydah shouldn’t be involved in the making of the cream...."

But he said he didn’t own the pharmacy per se. That would be a conflict.  But, Uwaydah, offered him the job at the pharmacy even though Uwaydah didn’t own it.

Asks Redding who his attorney was who negotiated for him.

"My attorney was, Thomas... it’s been so long, I can’t remember." Buehler offers the last name of Keller. Redding agrees. Worked for Michael Soroy (sp?).

There were things Redding felt were left out of the contract.   People enter into evidence a photograph of a letter. People’s 93.  Witness reviews the letter. It’s a letter from Reddings lawyer to Uwaydah’s lawyer, discussing that he would be willing to discuss any points in the contract that were in contention. The letter is dated Feb 26th, 2008.

Witness is excused and is allowed to remain in the courtroom.

People call Kelly Duncan. Tall, slender pretty blond girl. Looks a little like Cameron Diaz.

2. Kelly Duncan
Identifies Juliana. The amazing Juliana Redding. She was a very good friend. I met her in college right before 2006. Knew her three years. Knew about her relationship with Dr. Uwaydah. “It lasted one month to three months, I don’t really know.” Identifies Munir Uwaydah’s photo. First met Uwaydah  in Marina del Rey at the top of one of the apartment complexes that he apparently owned. Also met Dr. Uwaydah’s employees.  Letti Lemuse (sp?). She had worked for other doctors, and thought maybe her weight loss program would fit into his practice.  She met Paul Turley. Who also worked for Dr. Uwaydah, ran the office. Met with Turley to pitch her weight loss program.  She never met Marissa(sp?). Never met Shelly. :I’ve heard both of those names from Juliana.”

Juliana was going to work as Uwaydah’s assistant, or secretary, making $20.00 an hour. Last time she saw Juliana was March 15th. Went to dinner at Tengu, in Santa Monica. Dinner was early at 6, 6:15. They didn’t stay very long at the restaurant. Left about 7 PM.

I was going back to boyfriends house. Juliana had a photo shoot the next day.  People show her the restaurant photograph. That was taken at the Tengu restaurant. She happened to have a throw away camera. Was that an accurate photo of her?

“Yes! She’s amazing!”  The left the restaurant in different cars.

She’s never met or seen Ms. Park before. "Juliana never mentioned her. And I would know, because I have the same name."


How many of Dr. Uwaydah’s employee’s did you meet?

I met Paul Turley and Letti (sp?). Those are the only one’s I met. Well I met Uwaydah, he count’s.

Judge Kennedy explains to the witness that Dr Uwaydah can’t be his own employee.

Court breaks for lunch.  One of the difficulties on using a laptop is the very limited number of places to work and plug in my computer.  There are only a handful of tables in the cafeteria near an electrical outlet.  I don’t want to have a situation where I don’t have enough battery left to take notes.

I may have a short update at the afternoon break listing who testified, but my next big posting will be after I get home.

1:15 PM 
Up on the 9th floor, waiting for the courtroom to open. The hallway is a mix of Park and Redding supporters. Park takes a seat ten quickly moves down the hall to where her attorneys are. I believe I see her bail bondsman standing with her and Buehler.  I see Det. Thompson round the corner from the elevator bay with the prosecution's rolling cart carrying their files. 

7:48 PM Afternoon session continued in Day 3, Part II...


Anonymous said...

Will we be able to see videos of opening statements?

Robert said...

Kind of an odd FYI, but when the SMPD found the body, I had just driven down the PCH and then exited the 10. When I drove past the apartment I remember saying to myself, "that doesn't look good." Police were everywhere.

Sprocket, do you know if your cowboys have made any progress or made an arrest in the case of Raul Lopez, the waiter who was shot out in the valley last year? I was going through your archives and wondered what happened there. Poor man.


Anonymous said...

Great job! Awesome coverage! I feel I'm inside the courtroom !

Sprocket said...

Robert, No arrest yet in the murder of Raul Lopez. I know they are working the case but at this time I cannot detail their progress.

Anonymous said...

Great coverage!!!

Anonymous said...

Hanging on your every word, keep up the great work.

Robert said...

BTW, as others have said, your coverage is awesome and as always, is spot on.

I would say that It sounds like the ghost of Dominick Dunne, but you have your own voice and it is always a wonderful read.

Anonymous said...

Well done, Sprocket! I saw a brief report from Miriam Hernandez on Channel 7ABC tonight. Your coverage is great! I got a little lost on the pre-trial motions, but once you started with the Opening statements, I was right there! Unusually short statement from the defense, huh?


Sprocket said...

Robert, I'm flattered by the comparison, but there is no way my writing is comparable to Dominick. Dominick was a world traveler and an absolutely wonderful writer. He always had a great story to go along with the trial coverage about the people he was covering. Dominick said, that people came up to him all the time, to tell him things. I don't think he had to go looking for sources. He was... amazing.

Sprocket said...

Attention All Readers:

For those of you who don't want to leave a comment, you can always email me through the blog. You can get the link to my email address by clicking on my "Sprocket" name under "Contributors."