Showing posts with label Daniel Nardoni. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Daniel Nardoni. Show all posts

Thursday, August 15, 2019

Michael Gargiulo Verdict Reached

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, June 2008

UPDATED!
August 15, 2019
The Los Angeles Superior Court's Public Information Office states that a verdict has been reached in the Gargiulo trial. The verdict will be read at 11 am PT.

Unfortunately, I will not be able to attend the reading. I will update T&T readers as soon as I hear news from the court.

August 16, 2019
Yesterday, after a little more than three days of deliberation, Gargiulo was convicted of first degree murder in the stabbing deaths of Ashley Ellerin on February 21, 2001 and Maria Bruno on December 1, 2005. Gargiulo was also convicted of premeditated attempted murder of Michelle Murphy on April 28, 2008 and attempted escape from the El Monte Jail on June 18, 2008. In the murders and attempted murders, the jury also found true the special circumstances of lying-in-wait and using a deadly weapon, a knife.

There are two more phases left in the Gargiulo case: Sanity and penalty phase.

Jurors return Tuesday, August 20, to hear evidence in the sanity phase. If jurors decide that Gargiulo was sane during these crimes, they will then hear evidence to determine Gargiulo's punishment. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty.

Sunday, June 2, 2019

Michael Gargiulo Case - Opening Statements 5/2/19 Part I

May 2, 2019
Michael Gargiulo Trial - Opening Statements, Morning Session, Part I


NOTE: I was using my laptop to take notes during opening statements. I accidentally had auto-correct switched on which made it difficult to re-interpret what I had originally typed. I edited my notes from memory. This is still a rough draft with possibly more editing to be done. Sprocket

Who's Here at the Gargiulo Opening Statements
There are so many new faces from the press attending the opening that I don’t know. Here is a list in order of appearance/notice. 

CBS News is the pool reporter with a camera in the far left corner. Nathan from Courthouse News is here. The head of the court’s Public Information Office, Mary Hern is here. With Mary Hearn is Ann Donlan newly hired Communications Director for the LA County Superior Court. Ms. Donlan introduces herself and hands out her card. Terri Vermeulen Keith from City News and Carolyn Murnick, Ashely Ellerin's high school friend who wrote a book about her and Ashley’s friendship. Defense attorney Dan Nadoni is here, with his standard kerchief -navy and red today- in his suit pocket. Defense lead counsel Dale Rubin is now talking to Mary Hearn. Los Angeles Times reporter Alene Tchekmedyian who I met at the Jennifer Francis civil trial is here. The prosecution team, Deputy DA’s Daniel Akemon and Garrett Dameron have now shown up. Court reporter Laurie Small and her husband Retired Detective Thomas Small who investigated the Ellen murder are in the gallery.

Local NBC 4 Patrick Healy arrives. I brief him on why this case has taken so long. More media arrive. Young clerks from DA’s office and Deputy DA’s are here. The young clerks have the blue badges and the Deputy DA’s are all wearing dark suits. At the prosecution table there is a new female assistant. I’m guessing she may handle the documents during opening statements.


Tracy from DA’s Victim Advocate unit arrives. There is a pretty black woman sitting with her. In the very back row is a handsome black reporter I don’t recognize. RHD Detective Daryn Dupree who worked the Grim Sleeper case comes in and says hello to other detectives in the gallery, then leaves. Retired LA County Sheriff’s Detective Mark Lillienfield is here saying hello to People Magazine's Christine Pelisek. Another female reporter I don’t know arrives. More reporters show up that I’ve never seen and sit in the back row. Terri and I talk new doggies. Alex from the London Sun introduces himself. The attorneys in the well from both teams have been chatting back and forth for a while now.


9:30 AM
Wendy announces to the room she is bringing the jury through in the 3rd row. This row will be empty for the jury to walk through. We are all to be quiet and remain seated. There are many older looking people on the panel.  A few middle age white males as well as Latino men and women. I don’t see a single young face. A woman with pretty dyed red hair. The jury goes back into the jury room to wait.

On the right side of the gallery behind the bailiff’s desk, the very young  interns from the DA’s office move up a row to sit with Tracy. Mr. Rubin and Detective Small are chatting in the well. So many faces in the back row I don’t know. Terri Keith is so dedicated. She is reading documents and making notes on other cases while we wait.

There are four deputies in the well now waiting for the defendant to be brought out.

Another individual that might be from the DA’s office sits with RHD Detective Greg Stearns -one of the voices in the infamous Stephanie Lazarus interview video- and another detective right beside Sterns.


Two more casually dressed women arrive and sit with Stearns in the second bench row behind the bailiff's desk. This is a light crowd. No one sitting in the front row yet and the third row is clear for the jury to walk through. More stragglers arrive. Another CBS reporter. We make room for that person in the second row.

Judge Fidler’s clerk Wendy watches everything going on in the courtroom. Dale Rubin smiles, shakes Thomas Small’s hand then sits at the defense table. Last little moments around the well of the court before the jury is brought in. Deputy DA Akemon chats with Detective Small for a moment. Dan Nardoni and Deputy DA Garrett Dameron chat quickly. Akemon and Small are still chatting.



9:43 AM
Bailiffs ask for quiet in the courtroom. Gargiulo s brought out. He looks much like I've seen him over the past several years except he's in civilian clothes today. He’s got a white goatee. Bald head. Black horn rimed glasses. I don’t notice a tie. The defendant smiles as Dan Nardoni leans in to talk to him. Nardoni rubs the defendant’s back. Gargiulo is wearing a purple shirt, dark pants.


The courtroom becomes eerily quiet. I can hear my keys type. I didn’t have time to pick up a keyboard silencer. We are now waiting on Judge Fidler. Gargiulo smiles again as he chats with defense counsel Nardoni.



9:45 AM Judge Filder Takes the Bench
Judge Fidler states someone wanted to raise an issue. All the counsel go to the bench to speak to the court. Rubin tells the court about the  “…onslaught of ABC news, … the media … I find that disturbing”



I believe Mr. Rubin continues with, “ … last in the middle of survivor a news story came on. I don’t know if we can do …. access…”

I hear DA Akemon respond, “I agree.” Judge Fidler asks, “How did they get pictures?” Nardoni responds to the court but I miss his statement.

Gargiulo leans forward, his left hand on his chin. He is intently watching the activity at the bench.

Mr. Rubin is now in a discussion with DDA’s Akemon and Dameron. I believe I hear the defense say, 'We are in the process of getting a jail [cell?] at the police department.'

Note: Sounds like something happened at the jail.  A stabbing?
 Sprocket

9:50 AM

Judge Filder tells the parties. “Ready for the jurors.”

A reporter tells me that the media got pictures from Chicago of when he was growing up.



The jury files through and takes their seats. Judge Fidler greets the jury. Judge Fidler addresses the jury about jury instructions. "Your verdict must be decided by the law and the evidence as it is provided to you.” I don’t type out the extensive jury instructions. This is something that will be provided to the jury after closing arguments.



The defendant keeps himself facing forward. He does not look over at the jury. People in the back row try to get a look at the jury.  From my viewpoint, there are five women seven men.

Note: I believe I have that correct. Sprocket

Alternates are three men and three women. Gargiulo watches Judge Fidler give the jury instructions. There are five bailiffs in the courtroom. One in the back by the entry doors and four around Gargiulo.

An individual who looks like and LAPD employee and friend enter late. They are asked to move to the fourth row. Judge Fidler asks Mr. Rubin if he wants the circumstantial evidence instruction read. Mr. Rubin indicates yes. A female detective or it’s a Deputy DA, I can't tell, enters and sits beside Detective Greg Stearns.



The jurors are ordered by the court not to post on Facebook & Twitter about the trial. Dan Nardoni, asks the court, in an abundance of caution puts forth an oral motion to exclude any an all witnesses from the gallery. Deputy DA Akemon joins that motion.


Opening Statements

And we start. Deputy DA Akemon puts up four photos on the big bulletin board. Tricia Paciccio, Ashley Ellerin, Maria Bruno and Michelle Murphy. 



Note: You can see an image of what the jury was shown HERE. Sprocket


Photos of the women, the year of the event and their age. (Paciccio 1993, Ellen 2001, Bruno 2005, Murphy 2008)

 DDA Akemon greets the jury.

The methodical and systematic slaughter of women by Michael Gargiulo, the boy next door. A killer. That’s what this case is about. Michael Gargiulo was watching. Always watching. Plotting the perfect opportunity to attack women in and around their homes.


What you will hear is … [Tricia Pacaccio] Ashley Ellerin, Michelle Murphy and Maria Bruno were all young attractive and outgoing. What these women also had in common was they all lived near Mr. Gargiulo. He had targeted them for murder and he ultimately attacked all of them with a knife.

From the onset you will learn that Gargiulo was a neighborhood kid who grew up in and around the Chicago area. He was athletic. He played high school football. He later worked as an air conditioning repairman and eventually owned his own plumbing business. And he was a husband and father. What no one knew for many years is that Michael Gargiulo was leading a double life.

He fancied himself an expert in forensic science. He attacked four women with a knife killing three of them and able to escape detection for almost 15 years.


How did he plan the attacks? The evidence will show that Gargiulo’s plan to kill was to first identify a target that lived near him. He would acquaint himself with that victim, their lives and routines. The evidence will show he stalked and hunted down the victim relentlessly … to plan his kill.

He watched and waited and collected real time intelligence on the victims. He then manipulated the circumstances to pounce and kill in a blitz type knife attack and then escape detection.

His killing spree ended in 2008 when he accidentally cut himself during one of the attacks and he bled all over the victim’s bedspread and sheets.

You will hear that his killing spree started in Chicago in summer of 1993 almost 26 year ago.

He killed his first victim 18 year old Tricia Pacaccio, who lived in Glenview, Illinois, an affluent neighborhood. Gargiulo lived around the corner [from her].

Friday August 13, of 1993. It was hot and muggy in Glenview and a thick fog settled over the area. Tricia Pacaccio ended her Friday at TGI Fridays. Tricia and her friends had just all graduated and were bidding each other a final farewell and heading off in different directions to college.

Tricia was bound off to Purdue University and had earned an engineering scholarship. For Tricia it was the summer of her life and the end of a perfect evening with friends. What she didn’t know is that Gargiulo who lived around the corner had targeted Tricia for murder.

She would never make it to college and the summer of 1993 would be her last. On the night that Tricia was killed she gave several friends a ride home after leaving TGI Fridays. She dropped her last passenger off a little after 1 am and walked up to her door, keys in hand but never made it inside.

Gargiulo was waiting for her. Gargiulo, who was experienced in marital arts, snapped her arm and stabbed her in the breast and chest. He left her bleeding on the doorstep of her home and fled. Tricia’s father found her the next morning.


Years later Gargiulo bragged to friends about killing Tricia. “ I left the bitch on the steps for dead.” Gargiulo’s DNA was found on Tricia’s fingernails. As detectives worked to solved the case, Gargiulo moved across the country and took up residence near Ashley Ellerin. Ashley was young and social with the Hollywood crowd. She soon attracted Gargiulo’s attention.

He frequented the dog park across the street from her house and injected himself into Ashely’s life. He offered to change a tire. Then offered to fix a furnace. He then showed up unannounced. A friend saw him staring up into the house at odd hours. Shortly before she was killed he crashed a party at their house. He obtained a key somehow and got inside and scared her. One of her friends concluded that he was stalking Ashely and she should be concerned.

One day he appeared unannounced and her roommate [was there?]. Gargiulo told the roommate that the FBI was pursuing him for a murder from Chicago. He showed the roommate a knife in a sheath (in his ankle).

Feb 21, 2001. Ashley was found stabbed to death [the next morning] in her hallway. She was stabbed over 47 times.

The evidence will show that the defendant attacked Ashley from behind, cutting through from right to left nearly decapitating her, indicating an attack from a left handed perpetrator. Gargiulo is left handed. The attack on Ashley shared several characteristics with [the attacks on] Tricia Pacaccio, Maria Bruno and Michell Murphy.

Gargiulo moved away to another city.

[In El Monte] Gargiulo entered Maria Bruno's apartment, put on blue surgical boots and murdered Maria while she slept. He stabbed her multiple times and gashed out her throat. Cut off her breasts and attempted to remove her breast implants and placed one of her breasts in her mouth.

Maria Bruno’s murder shared several similar events as the other victims. Gargiulo lived in the very same complex [as Bruno] and [from his upper floor unit] could see into her very own living room. Gargiulo attempted to inject himself in the victims life. He surveilled the victim in her home.

A witness saw someone matching his description watching the victim, staring. And also entered her apartment uninvited. Gargiulo left his DNA at the crime scene.

Afterwards, Maria’s husband discovered her body and called police. [Detectives] located a surgical bootie outside Maria’s front door. Analyst discovered there were drops of Maria’s blood on the booties. Gargiulo’s DNA was found around the elastic band. Years later, the matching bootie was found in Gargiulo’s apartment attic [space].

While that case was under investigation, Gargiulo moved to Santa Monica, and moved into an apartment across the alley from Michelle Murphy. Again, Gargiulo lived near the victim in an apartment directly across the alley where he was able to see into her apartment and see her movements.

April 20, 2008, at approximately 8 pm, Michelle Murphy went to bed. She was alone. Her roommate was out of the country. It was a warm evening, and she left a window open.

He climbed onto the railing, sliced through the screen with knife and climbed through the window. He found Michelle sleeping in her bed.

Gargiulo learned over her and stabbed her in the chest with a knife.

Michelle woke up and fought with Gargiulo as he stabbed repeatedly, stabbing her hands and arms as she defended herself. Michele who was very athletic in her own right was able to get her legs [underneath?] her. She was able to kick Gargiulo causing him to cut his own wrist.
Bleeding profusely, he ran out the door and said “I’m sorry.” He left a blood trail out the alley.

Gargiulo’s blood was on Michelle’s bedspread and sheet combined with Michelle’s blood. He left his DNA at the crime scene. When Gargiulo’s DNA was found on her bedspread and sheet it linked him with DNA on Tricia Pacaccio’s fingernails and the bloody booties from Maria [Bruno’s murder].


Gargiulo was arrested in June of 2008. When Gargiulo was held in the El Monte jail, he made makeshift handcuff keys, planned to attack a jailer, steal a police car and escape to Mexico.

Now back to the details of each stabbing. It all started in Glenview, Illinois in the Summer of 1993. What you seeing on the screen are the four women.

Tricia was 18 years old.
Ashes was 22.
Maria was 32.
Murphy was age 26 when she was attacked.

Chronology
It started on the doorstep around the corner from Gargiulo’s residence. He told one friend, “I actually left the bitch on the steps for dead.” Gargiulo’s DNA was on Tricia Pacaccio’s fingernails.

In 2001 Ashley Ellerin was stabbed to death in Hollywood. He entered Ashley’a house without permission.

In 2005 Maria Bruno was stabbed to death inside her residence. Gargiulo lived across the pool from Ms. Bruno’s residence. The bootie found outside her door had his DNA on it.

In 2008 Michelle lived across the alley.  Gargiulo left a blood trial across the alley. In 2008 Gargiulo was arrested and tried to escape from jail.

Tricia Pacaccio Murder
A photo of Tricia is put up on the screen. Then a photo of Tricia’s home in Glenview. Deputy DA Akemon points out Tricia’s bedroom on the second floor. He points out the door where she was stabbed outside of her home. The photo shows her car was parked in the driveway.

DDA Akemon now presents an aerial photo of Gargiulo’s home area. Gargiulo’s and Tricia’s home are 550 feet apart on the diagonal. He tells the jury that each victim lived within eye-shot and ear shot. Now we are shown a photo of Gargiulo’s residence in 1993. He lived there with brothers and sisters and mom and dad.

Deputy DA Akemon explains the event that Tricia participated in right before she was murdered, a road rally. Up on the screen there are about 40 names, to show the jury about how many kids were involved. These are the students who participated in the road rally roster. About 40 people attended. Deputy DA Akemon explains that it was like a treasure hunt.

Next is a photo of the TGI Fridays where Tricia’s group ended up that evening. August 13 going over into the 14th, 1993.

August 13, Tricia’s group arrived at TGI Fridays. Gargiulo was dropped off at home 12:30 am. At 1 am Tricia dropped off her friend. She arrived home around 1:15am.

In 1997 Gargiulo told a friend, “I stabbed up a girl.” He told another friend, “I stabbed up the bitch.”

 In 2002 Gargiulo’s DNA  matched up to the DNA found on Tricia Pacaccio.

Deputy DA Akemon explains that Gargiulo is not charged with Tricia’s murder in California. The presentation is used for special evidence even though the jury will not decide guilt or innocence in that case.

Next on the screen are photos of most of the people who attended the road rally that night. About 40 of them. Of those 40 people, many were people that Tricia had contact with that evening. None of those people’s DNA was found on Tricia.

Now the jury is shown photos of Tricia Pacaccio’s crime scene. Tricia’s car, a blue Buick is in the driveway. She parked her car, walked across the law to the side door of the residence and then [would have] headed to her bedroom.

Photo of crime scene, outside of house, August 14, 1993. Tricia's body is located at the face of that white door. Now a photo of Tricia’s body on the doorstep. Her feet on the lower step, her head is closer to the door. We are shown another view of her body on the doorstep then a closer view of her on the doorstep. It is so sad. She was so close to getting inside. At the upper part of the door is Tricia’s pocketbook, and near her head are her car keys. Another photo that shows the keys at the top of her head.


Coroner’s Evidence
Tricia was stabbed 12 times and she had a spiral fracture of the left arm.

Deputy DA Akemon details each wound and where they were located on her body. Shows photos of the wounds. Many stab wounds to the left arm. X-ray’s of Tricia’s left arm that show the spiral fracture. X-ray clearly shows it snapped.

What you will hear in this case, when Tricia Pacaccio’s body was taken to the morgue in Chicago, somebody, some person, tampered with her clothing. Another photo. What you looking at here are photos of Tricia’s body in the morgue, when she was transported to the morgue she was fully clothed.

And [also] and at the scene her hands were bagged at the scene. When they did the post mortem they noticed her clothing had been manipulated. That’s when a coroner’s investigators said that’s not the way she was [when she was brought into the morgue].  Somebody, it was never determined who, pulled her panties down and also pulled her t-shirt over her breasts. There’s no evidence that she was sexually assaulted, or the bags on her hands were tampered with, only her clothing was tampered with. Through the photos, we can see that the bags are still on Tricia’s hands in photos.

There will be DNA evidence in this case. A DNA expert tested [her] fingernails. Compared them to Gargiulo. A DNA match [came back], one in 97 million. No other DNA found on her fingernails. Only her own DNA.

People who attended the road rally. Gargiulo did not attend the road rally. There were [people] hugging and kissing that evening saying goodbye. Despite all those people having contact with Tricia that night, the only person whose DNA shows up on her fingernails is Michael Gargiulo.

Photo of a DNA evidence table. Expert will give an opinion. The DNA is a match and that will explain the DNA.


This is to Tricia Pacaccio’s case. Her brother Tom discovered her body with other family members. [Gargiulo] was not a friend of Tricia. [They] did not have any sort of relationship. He was a friend of Tricia’s brother. Gargiulo was 17 and lived around the corner. Tricia’s mother [will testify]. There was no reason for her to have contact with Gargiulo.

Doug was Tricia’s younger brother. This was Gargiulo’s friend. He will testify that he was friend of Gargiulo. There was no reason for Tricia to have any contact, physical contact with Gargiulo. What you will hear that night Tricia had [upset?] Rick Pacaccio [her father]. She took a long shower that night. She was very clean. She had an argument with her father for taking such a long shower. There’s no reason for her to have physical contact with Gargiulo.

[You will hear from] Andrew [Crouch?], Jennifer Spanjer, and [Karen?] Isenberg, Tricia’s friends. Tricia had physical contact with her friends. Very touchy feely. Gargiulo was not present at the [road rally].

You will hear from Gargiulo’s ex-girlfriend. On the night of Tricia’s murder, she was with Mr. Gargiulo. She dropped him off at [12:30 am? 1 am?] around the corner from Tricia’s residence before the stabbing. That was to show that he was in a position … No physical contact between Tricia and Gargiulo that night.

The Anarchist Cookbook
Next slide is up on the screen.

About 10:55 am, Judge Fidler calls for a break.

At the break, several reporters that are in the hallway, watching the cable feed and are asking for the attorneys to be identified for their reporting.

11:12 am
Judge Fidler’s clerk, Wendy, call’s for the jury. A sheriff’s deputy informs the courtroom that at the lunch break everyone [in the gallery] is to remain seated until all the jurors have left then you may go.

11:13 am
The Jury comes out then Judge Fidler comes out.

Deputy DA Akemon continues his presentation. What you will hear in this case, one of Gargiulo’s [friends] Suzanne [will testify] that Mr. Gargiulo liked this book [The Anarchist Cookbook] and he talked about this book. And he talks about what’s in there. This book talks about knives. There is a section for, there’s a section on knives. And how to use a knife on various sections of the body. Cuts to the throat, subclavian area. A key to this type of attack is the speed and silent [method] … based on approaching the enemy from behind …

Prosecutor Akemon mentions that there is no evidence of sexual assault with the victims in this case and the DNA matching.


Prosecutor Akemon mentions a former friend of Gargiulo’s, Anthony [?] who worked with Gargiulo as a bouncer at the Rainbow Room Bar in Hollywood in the 1990’s. I believe he presents a photo of them together at a party. This witness had a prior criminal history for theft and drug offenses. He [this witness] was the one that Gargiulo said this is from a [prior incident?]. Gargiulo told his friend, “I actually left the bitch on the steps for dead.”

Deputy DA Akemon puts up a photo of Tricia where she was found on her doorstep.

Temer Leary, another friend of Gargiulo’s. He also worked with Garigulo as a bouncer at the Rainbow Room Bar in Hollywood the 1990’s. He has a prior criminal record including violent offenses. Mr. Gargiulo told him that he “he stabbed up the girl” referring to Ms. Pacaccio.

These former friends of Gargiulo’s saw Gargiulo on television accused of the Pacaccio murder. When they saw that they were shocked per [their] girlfriends. They had one of those moments of watching Gargiuo on TV. When they found what they knew was relevant they texted to each other about being heroes.

Ashley Ellerin Case

Photos of Ashley are up on the screen. Ms. Ellerin was 22 when Gargiulo stabbed her to death. A Photo of Ellerin’s residence on Pinehurst Road in Hollywood. Photos of the house gated and a red car in front. Now an aerial view of the area showing where various things are.

When Ms. Ellerin was stabbed to death he [Gargiulo] lived in Hollywood at his building there [points to photo] and Ashely lived right down the street, about 400 feet down the street.

Across the street from Ms. Ellerin is the dog park. And Gargiulo frequented the dog park and Gargiulo would watch from that park.

Deputy DA Akemon will tells the jury they will go to a site visit and see the particular scenes so you can see the geography yourself and these particular scenes you will be able to see this house.

1759 Orchid Ave was Gargiulo’s apartment building. Showing a type of aerial view from the top of that building and you can see Ellerin’s house off in the distance. The roof of Gargiulo’s building is open to the tenant’s. And her bedroom is on that side of the house. You can see if the light is on or off from the roof of Gargiulo's building.

Pointing out on a photo, this is the dog park. Right across from Ellerin’s residence.

Now a view of what her home looked like from the dog park at night. But when the house was lit up inside you can see what was going on inside. And we show this to show that Mr. Garguilo was watching all the time. Pointing out on a photo, here is the front door to Ellerin’s home. Now a floor plan of Ellerin’s residence.

Older style bungalow home and the floor plan is older. The prosecutor explains where the front door is, the sun room. We’ll explain that when Ashton Kutcher came over and which window that he looked into the house.

Her bedroom is in the upper left hand corner. She just exited the shower and was getting ready to go out with Mr. Kutcher when she was attacked from behind. Identifies the other rooms on the photo. Points out the layout and the rooms and the windows that Kutcher looks into.

February 21, 2001. Ashley drops her father off at the airport. Between 7 and 8 pm her friend Durbin came over and they had sex. Then he left and she locked the door. At 8:24 pm Ashley talked to Ashton Kutcher on the phone with a plan to go out that night.

A man, Mr. Todd Jackson, around 8:30 to 9 pm heard screaming from her house. He was walking his dog in the dog park. 



Between 9 and 9:20 pm Mr. Durbin called her three times but Ashely did not answer. 


10 pm another friend called. 

10:15 pm Ashton Kutcher called and got no inswer.

10:15 pm Ashley’s roommate was locked out of the house.
10:45 pm Ashton Kutcher arrives, knocks on the door and looked inside and saw what he thought was spilled wine on the floor.

On the following day, 9:15 am Jennifer Disisto discovered her body.

Up on the screen is a photo of Ashley on her back, on leg splayed out her finger pointed toward her leg. Again, seeing Ashely is quite sad. There was a very violent struggle in this small space. Ashley was stabbed 47 times.

More crime scene floor plans of the house are presented. Now a view of the front door to the house. Explains layout and relation as to where her body is in this photo. Ashley’s body is inside the red circle in the photo. New photo showing the angle from her bedroom, her feet toward the bathroom door. 

The most severe injury to the neck area. She was nearly decapitated.

Dr. Ortiz [performed the autopsy]. He will give the opinion this is from a left to right cut so a left handed person. Bloody footprints and blood drops. Criminalist Steve Schliebe will testify to what the blood drops and the footprints mean. What we believe is the path he took to get out of the house.

Coroner Evidence
Stabbed 47 times. Overview of the injuries are presented. The first stab wounds were to her head. Many to her head first. Deputy DA Akemon goes over each stab wound and what area of the body they went through.
The coroner will testify that this stab wound on her neck nearly decapitated her body. More stab wounds are presented to the jury.


In the coroner’s photos, you can see her head was shaved to get a better photo of her stab wounds. Now describing wounds 28-30, wounds to her neck. Stab wounds 36-38 to the left hand, defense wounds. Stab wounds 39 40 are right hand defense wounds. More stab wounds to the hands. All defense wounds.

Deputy DA Akemon tells the jury about witnesses they will hear from in Ashley's case.

A photo from a party is shown. Ashely and her friends standing with her. Justin Peterson was her room mate. And this is Jennifer Disisto who discovered Ashley’s body. And Justin came face to face with Mr. Gargiulo.

It was during this party when Gargiulo was fixated with on Ms. Ellerin.
 There in the back of a photo, appears to be Gargiulo at this party..

This woman who was the party was for, will testify about the photos. Justin Peterson was Ashley’s friend. At social gatherings Gargiulo was watching Ashley.

Just Peterson, identified Mr Gargiulo as the man he saw outside of Ms. Ellerin’s house out in the middle of the night watching Ms. Ellerin’s home. Mr. Gargiulo was hanging out in this green truck, sitting in the truck and watching the house. Justin Peterson will testify that Gargiulo flashed a knife and Peterson drew [a sketch of] the knife he saw.

Mark Durbin,. Mr. Durbin was Ashley’s friend and landlord. He had sex with Ashley the night of the stabbing. He left her residence at 8:15 pm. He had to be home by 8:30 to meet his girlfriend. He called Ashley at 9 and 9:15 pm and she did not answer. Because he had sex with her he was initially looked at.


Ashton Kutcher, Ashley’s friend called at 10:45 pm. Mr. Kushner is called to testify to show there was a very narrow opportunity in this case.


Jennier Disisto. Ashley friend and roommate. She came home at 10:15 pm. The door was locked and she didn’t have her keys. She left and stayed the night with a friend. She came home the next day and discovered her body.


Anthony Castellane, Ashely’s friend.  He attended a party at Ashley’s residence. Gargiulo shows up uninvited and was the last guest to leave. Gargiulo fixated on Ashley. Anthony decided to stay and sleep on the sofa he was so concerned.

Monica Grandy. Will testify Gargiulo was fixated on Ashely. Weeks before Ashley was stabbed to death Gargiulo came into the apartment, [somehow] obtained a key, surprised her and Ashley and ran away.

Todd Jackson. Walked his dog in the dog park. Heard a scream from Ashley’s residence.

Witness Steve Schliebe, LA County Sheriff’s blood spatter expert. [I know Steve. He’s an excellent criminalist. Sprocket] Will testify blood drops are oriented to the door meaning the blood will go out that door. Gargiulo headed out that door. A line of blood drops to the left of the foot prints.


Maria Bruno Murder
She was 32 years old when Gargiulo mutilated her. Photos of Bruno’s residence. Deputy DA Akemon tells the jury they will go out to the residence and see the relationship between Ms. Bruno’s apartment and Gargiulo’s. And just to the left is the kitchen window and that’s the point of entry.

A photo view of Gargiulo’s and Ms. Bruno’s apartments in Arden apartment complex. Gargiulo’s apartment was 20 feet away across the pool. From his living room he could look right down into Ms. Bruno’s apartment. Another photo view showing her apartment looking up to Gargiulo’s apartment. This is the view Gargiulo had of Ms. Bruno’s apartment. Deputy DA Akemon points out in the image the point of entry, the kitchen window.

Cronology of the night of Ms. Bruno’s Murder

November 23, 2005, she was moved into the apartment complex. She moved there because she believed it was a very secure apartment building.

December 1, 2005, at 11:30 pm her and estranged husband left for a date. Maria and her husband Irving went out, they were drinking heavily, and then came back to the apartment and had sex.

The evidence will so that as soon as Irving left, Mr. Gargiulo entered her apartment. Since they had been drinking her husband drove her home and came back the next day to take her back to her job.

Her husband Irving climbed into her window to wake Maria up. He found her body and called 911. 

The prosecution plays the 911 call for the jury. He’s sobbing on the 911 recording.

“Someone broke into my wife’s house and they killed her.”



One of her nipples was placed over her mouth. 



Gargiulo turns toward Mr. Nardoni and leans in to talk to him. 

Crime Scene photos of Maria’s body. There are parts muted out of the photos. A photo of Maria’s body on the bed. DDA Akemon flashes through a series of photos before shutting down the presentation. Now Gargiulo is leaning in to speak to Mr. Rubin and Mr. Nardoni.

At 11:55 am Judge Fidler excuses the jury for the lunch break.


To be continued in Part II….


LINKS
Images from Opening Statements
Images from ShutterStock


Courthouse News Story on Opening
Local ABC 7 Story
People Magazine Story
Local NBC 4 Story

NY Daily News
Zimbo Photos

Monday, May 6, 2019

Michael Gargiulo Case: 11 Years From Arrest to Opening Statements

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, June 6, 2008

May 6, 2019
Eleven Years From Arrest to Opening Statements

One of the questions I often receive about the Michael Gargiulo case is, Why did this case take so long to get to trial?

Murder trials in LA County can take years to bring to trial. Defendants out on bail usually take longer to bring to trial than in-custody defendants. Multiple murder cases will take even longer. There is more evidence to present and more witnesses to interview.

However, even the Grim Sleeper case (charged with the murder of 11 victims) took less time to get from arrest to opening statements (5 years, 7 months) than the Gargiulo case (10 years, 11 months).

Cameron Brown was in custody over ten years but that was for three trials (two hung juries and a third trial ending in conviction). Gargiulo’s case is unusual in that he has been in custody almost 11 years until opening statements on May 2, 2019.



The answer to the question is complicated. It’s not a single issue. By my count, it was a series of eight separate events involving two different defense counsel, the defendant, the court and the prosecution team at different times over the past 11 years.



Arrest & Charges
In California, Michael Thomas Gargiulo was arrested on June 6, 2008. He was charged with burglary and the attempted murder of Michelle Murphy on April 28, 2008. The District Attorney’s office filed case number SA0068002 in the Airport courthouse. Deputy DA is Joseph A. Markus. Defendant was represented by private counsel. Defendant pleads not guilty. 


September 4, 2009
On September 4 Gargiulo was charged with four additional counts. Gargiulo pled not guilty to the following additional counts: Burglary and the murder of Ashley Ellen on February 21, 2001. Burglary and the murder of Maria Bruno on December 1, 2008.

Gargiulo requested representation by the court. However, for the next few months the clerk’s minute notes indicate he was represented from this date forward by a different private attorney. 



January 23 - February 24, 2009
1/23/09: Gargiulo’s lawyer made a request to the court that he be removed from the case. That request was granted and Gargiulo was appointed counsel from the Public Defender’s office. Gargiulo puts on the record that he would like to have a state appointed lawyer.
2/24/09: The Public Defender’s office and the Alternate Public Defender’s office declare conflicts in this matter and the office of the bar panel is appointed.



March 27 - December 11, 2009

Charles Lindner is appointed Gargiulo’s new counsel pending resolution of fees. 


5/15/09: Lindner informs the court that Department 123 has authorized his appointment of the case. 

7/17/09: Deputy DA Marna F. Miller has the case now. DDA Miller will present the case at the preliminary hearing almost a year later.


9/30/09: The prosecution presents to the court that the preliminary hearing will take two to three weeks and the defense states it will take a month. Based on the time estimates, the case is transferred to Dept 100, Master Calendar Court in downtown Los Angeles for transfer to a longer cause courtroom. There are no objections from counsel.



10/2/09 Dept. 100: Master Calendar Court transfers the case to Dept. 108, Judge Michael Johnson, on the 9th floor of the Clara Shortridge-Foltz Criminal Justice Center. The 9th floor is where long cause trials or complex cases are usually handled.

11/12/09: The complaint is amended. The actual change is not reflected in the clerk’s minute notes.


12/11/09: Clerk’s minute notes indicate the death penalty is pending. Second defense counsel, Dale Rubin is present in court.



January 5, 2010
A firm date of June 21, 2010 is set for the preliminary hearing. Over the next few months, subpoenas for documents come into the court are copied and disbursed. Discovery is completed. 



June 21, 2010
The preliminary hearing starts. The preliminary hearing takes eight days and is held on June 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 29, 30. On June 30, the court rules on the preliminary hearing. The people file an amended complaint to add a seventh charge. This charge is attempted escape during the Perkin’s Operation held in the El Monte Jail on June 17-18, 2008. The motion is granted. The court orders the defendant held to answer on all seven charges. Felony arraignment plea is scheduled for July 14, 2010. On that date Gargiulo is charged with seven counts. He pleads not guilty to all charges.



Note: Up to this point, things appear pretty standard in Los Angeles County Superior court for a defendant with a multiple murder charge and the death penalty pending.

November 10, 2010
The people state in open court their intention to seek the death penalty.

Delay #1

This is the first event that will extend the time it takes for the case to get to opening statements.




11/10/10: The people file their statement of aggravating factors by the next court appearance. Defense requests additional time to prepare their 995, motion to dismiss and that is granted. December 6 is set as the date for the parties to meet with Judge Sam Ohta the new judge who will preside over Dept. 108 and the case. On December 6, new dates are set for the filing of the 995 motion, people’s response and the defense reply.



January 19, 2011 -  July 5, 2011
1/19/11: Deputy DA David B. Walgren is added as people’s counsel. 

2/25/11: The court holds an in camera review of discovery documents. Court reporter’s notes are ordered sealed.



Note: There are several status checks over the next  few months where the defendant does not appear. These appear to be counsel declarations and records rechecks of the preliminary hearing record in a death penalty case.

7/5/11: The court certifies the preliminary hearing record is complete and accurate.

7/7/11: In Illinois, the Cook County State’s Attorney General charges Gargiulo with the 1993 first degree murder of Tricia Pacaccio.

Note: Once California is finished with Gargiulo, Illinois will take custody of Gargiulo.


August 16, 2011 - December 7, 2011
A few pretrial hearings where the case is continued. It appears Deputy DA Eric Harmon replaces Deputy DA Miller. The defense lodges their 995 motion with the court on December 7. The motion is 132 pages long.

January 2012 - May 14, 2012
2/15/12: Deputy DA Daniel Akemon appears for the people, replacing Deputy DA Walgren. DDA Akemon will be the lead prosecutor who eventually tries the case.
3/6/12: Order to LA County Sheriff to provide a booth for a psychiatrist Samuel I. Miles, M.D., in the attorney room to interview, examine and psychologically test defendant Michael Gargiulo is signed by the court.

Note: It is unknown if there is a specific event that triggers the need for a psychological evaluation.

4/25/12: Defendant’s oral Marsden motion and possible Pro Per motion are continued to 5/14.


5/14/12: Defendant is present and not represented by counsel. Defendant appears Pro Per. Out of the presence of the people, the defendant’s Marsden motion is argued and denied. In the presence of the people, the defendant’s motion to proceed in Pro Per is granted. Charles Lindner is ordered relieved.

Discovery is to be reacted prior to being turned over to the defendant. Faretta advisement waiver is signed and filed. Order to Sheriff for Pro Per funds in the amount of $60 including legal supplies is filed and faxed to the Sheriff’s Dept. 

This basically resets the case as if a new defense counsel was appointed.



Delay #2
The defendant going Pro Per in a death penalty case is the second event that delays the case significantly. The defendant retains his pro per status for approximately 30 months and only files a single motion of any significance during that time.


Note: From the time the defense filed their 995 motion on December 7, 2011, until May 2012, I can only assume there was a total breakdown of communication and/or cooperation between the defendant and his counsel. Defendant’s motion for new counsel (Marsden) was denied. Defendant went forward with a move to self-represent, Pro Per.



May 15, 2012 - July 12, 2012
5/23/12: Defendant has not received his Pro Per funds and has not been to the LASD jail law library to prepare a motion for appointment of an investigator. 



Note: Over the next few weeks, several hearings occur for the defendant to get Pro Per funds and for an investigator to be assigned. By July 12, Lindner is appointed stand-by counsel and the defendant has his first investigator, Christian Filipiak.

August 21, 2012
I attend my first pretrial hearing in the Gargiulo case. 

Gargiulo files his first motions. Motion for an order to receive and have boxes for voluminous discovery. Motion for an order to have one hand free and uncuffed in private booth in attorney room. Motion to receive law library privileges. The court finds these motions are sheriff security policy issues and are continued to September 5. Defendant’s motion to receive all color copies of crime scene photos is filed and continued to September 5. The court allows defendant’s investigator to give defendant a pair of prescription glasses and two current law books.

Any discovery turned over to the defendant is to be copied on yellow paper. 


Note: All of Gargiulo’s requests for funds are handled by a completely different judge/courtroom, usually Dept. 123 but occasionally Dept. 110.

September 5, 2012 - May 9, 2014
9/5/12: The prosecution files a motion to prevent the defendant from possessing in his cell, the crime scene photographs. After a review of relevant case law, the court rules on September 26 that copies of the crime scene photographs and videos will remain in the custody of defendant’s investigator and not in the defendant’s jail cell. The court orders a representative of the sheriff’s department to appear at the next pretrial hearing to address defendant’s motions that are in conflict with security policy at the jail.

10/29/12: The people turn over discovery material to the defendant.

Note: All future discovery that the people turn over to the defendant is documented in the court record.



11/28/12: Defendant’s motion to have one hand free and uncuffed in attorney room at MCJ (LASD Men’s Central Jail) is granted. Defendant’s motion for boxes is withdrawn. 

2/25/13: People submit a protective order for discovery filed under seal. Defendant’s motion for order of transcripts is argued and denied. Defendant’s motion for a medical order is signed and faxed. 



6/14/13: Defendant’s motion for order for court transcripts is filed. Standing court order for transcripts is in effect. Defendant’s opposition to the people’s stipulation to the Maria Rodriguez murder is filed this date and requires no action. Prosecution’s informal request for discovery (second request) is filed. Charles Lindner is in court and informs the court he has not received any demand for discovery from the defendant. Prosecution will provide standby counsel with discovery.



6/28/13: DDA Garrett Dameron appears on behalf of the people. Defendant’s ex parte motion for order for DA’s office to handover information re the murder of Maria Rodriguez (the Downy case) to Judge Sam Ohta for in camera review is filed.

7/19/13: Stipulation is signed by all parties on the Maria Rodriquez murder. The prosecution is on their tenth set of discovery materials turned over to the defendant.


11/22/13: Twelfth set of discovery materials turned over to the defendant. Investigator Chris Nicely is present in court.

Note: This is the first mention of Mr. Nicely in the clerk’s minute notes but I believe he has been working on the case for some time. 



1/31/14: The people’s motion to compel compliance with PC 1054 ET SEQ discovery procedures and quash subpoena duces tecum (SDT) investigating agency is placed off calendar. The defendant withdrawals his subpoena duces tecum. People’s subpoenaed records are opened in court and released to the people for copying and returned to the court. Two boxes of sealed medical records are lodged with the court.

2/21/14: The people’s 1054 motion and request to quash defense SDT’s mentioned on 1/31 is filed with the court. The fourteenth set of discovery materials is provided by the people to the defendant. Parties confer regarding ongoing discovery.


3/7/14: Parties confer regarding ongoing discovery. The people’s motion to compel discovery and quash subpoenas is continued to next court date.

3/14/14: People’s motion is continued to next court date. Defendant is instructed to file under seal, a document indicating how subpoenaed documents relate to his defense.


4/18/14: Matter continued  to 5/9. The people turn over more discovery materials to the defense.

5/8/14: Defendant is not present. An in camera hearing is held in chambers. Court reporter’s notes are sealed. 

5/9/14: The court is in receipt of the notice of results of [an] administrative hearing to deny defendant’s in custody [at LASD] pro per privileges for cause filed May 1, 2014. A hearing was conducted at Men’s Central Jail by the Sheriff’s Department on April 25, 2014. The hearing officer terminated defendant’s in-custody pro per privileges. A hearing date is set on May 16, 2014, for the court to review the Sheriff’s Department decision. LA County counsel is notified to appear on behalf of the LASD on May 16. An in camera review was held in chambers on May 8. Discovery is ordered turned over to defendant’s investigator to copy and return to this court upon completion. 



Delay #3
The event mentioned in the court file on 5/8 and 5/9 is is the third event that delays the case. When Gargiulo was returning to the jail after his court hearing on April 18, 2014, he was caught with contraband, a piece of metal hidden inside his mouth. This was a violation of LASD jail policy. The LASD revoked Gargiulo’s in custody pro per privileges and access to the law library. Even with this setback, defendant does not wish to relinquish his pro per status. He hangs onto it for six more months.




May 16, 2014 - November 7, 2014

5/16/14: The court conducts a review of the LASD administrative hearing [Wilson hearing] to deny defendant’s in custody pro per privileges. The cause is argued. The court finds substantial evidence to support the sheriff’s action to deny defendant’s access to the law library and pro per phone privilege. Defendant requests a transcript of today’s hearing. Defendant does not wish to relinquish his pro per status and will remain in pro per.

5/30/14: Defendant not present. Court rules on defendant exparte motion to receive local daily news paper and daily journal. The expasrte request is denied without prejudice.



6/27/14: Discovery material provided by the people to defendant. This is the seventeenth set of discovery documents from the people. People state that discovery to the defense is complete. People’s response to defendant’s informal discovery filed.


7/11/14: Matter delayed and case called in Dept. 107 as defendant needs a wheelchair to appear in court. Judge Lomeli signs a medical order for defendant to have his back and ankle checked.

9/25/14: Defendant’s motion for continuance is filed. Defendant’s oral motion to reinstate privileges is a matter for the sheriff’s department to address to the court. (There is no motion to reinstate privileges in the legal court file and the defendant cannot produce a conformed copy on this date.) Medical order is signed
10/10/14: Defendant’s opposition to people’s motion in liming re: statements obtained during Perkins operation at El Monte Jail is filed. People will re-submit a copy of people’s motion in limine. The parties confer regarding the letter dated 9/29/14 from the LASD re defendant’s pro per privileges. 


Note: This is the only significant motion that Gargiulo filed during his entire 30 month run representing himself in a death penalty case. The motion was not hand written like many of his other motions but typed. Someone other than Gargiulo prepared this motion.



11/07/14: Defendant’s motion to relinquish his pro per status is granted. Standby counsel Charles Lindner is appointed as defense counsel. Court orders LASD that defendant is allowed to keep his papers related to his case in his cell until further order of the court set for 1/9/2015. All papers in storage are to be preserved until further review on 1/9.



January 9, 2015 - July 23, 2015


1/9/15: Court and counsel confer regarding discovery. Defense counsel to meet with Detective Lillienfeld regarding discovery material in the possession of the defendant.


1/16/15: In camera hearing with defense counsel. Defendant is not present in court. Court reporter’s notes are ordered sealed. Defense document submitted to the court is ordered sealed and placed in a sealed-records envelope as confidential. Envelope not to be opened except on order of the court. 


5/7/15: Defendant’s motion to dismiss pursuant to PC section 995 is filed. Defendant’s oral Marsden motion is continued. 


Delay #4

Gargiulo trying to get his counsel replaced again with another Marsden motion is the next event that delays the case while the issue is resolved. I have no solid evidence to base my opinion on, but it appears to me Gargiulo and his court appointed attorney cannot stand each other and Gargiulo is doing everything he can to get a new attorney assigned.





Gargiulo’s Marsden hearing is held on seven different court dates over the next five weeks. 5/7, 5/14, 5/27, 6/2, 6/5, 6/9, 6/12.



6/12/15: On this date, the court denies Gargiulo’s oral Marsden motion. Gargiulo orally informs the court that he wishes to withdraw his general time waiver. The court, sensing Gargiulo is trying to punish or retaliate against his counsel, also orders defense counsel to speak to his client privately in the lock-up area. Lindner’s paralegal, his son Abe Lindner, and defense investigator Chris Nicely join Lindner in lock-up for this meeting. Afterwards, defense counsel informs the court that his client refused to speak to him in lock-up.  The defendant’s oral motion to withdraw his general time waiver is continued to 6/15.

6/15/15: Defendant’s oral request to withdraw general time waiver is granted. Counsel’s response to defendant’s request for speedy trial is filed. The last day until the trial must commence is 8/14/15.
6/30: Ongoing discovery is discussed.
7/14/15: Defense counsel informs the court that attorney Dale Rubin has been reappointed as co-counsel.  Court orders attorney Dale Rubin to be present on next court date.
7/23/15: Dale Rubin is present. Ongoing discovery is discussed. Defendant through his attorney requests to read a statement in open court without his attorney’s approval. Upon speaking to his attorney, the request is withdrawn. Case continued to 9/9.



August 27, 2015 - September 9, 2015
8/27/15 Department 123: On August 3, 2015, Charles Lindner counsel for the defendant submitted to this court a six-page letter detailing the circumstances of the inappropriate withdrawal of approximately $10,000 from the attorney-client trust fund in this matter by a third party. 


9/4/15 Department 100: On the direct order of Judge James Brandlin, [Presiding Judge of the LA Co. Superior Court] a Marsden motion is assigned to Judge Scott Gordon on 9/9 in Dept. 123.



9/9/15 Department 123: Cause is called for OSC and Marsden motion. Defense counsel Lindner and Rubin are present. Order to show cause is granted. Mr. Lindner is ordered to cooperate with the superior court’s finance department. Marsden motion is heard. Motion is granted. Lindner is relieved as counsel of record. Good cause exists for relieving Mr. Lindner as counsel independent of the findings in the Marsden motion. No conflicts exist between Mr. Rubin and the defendant. Rubin is conditionally appointed. Lindner is ordered to self-report himself to the State Bar of California and provide proof of reporting to this court within 30 days.

Delay #5
The court removes defense attorney Charles Lindner and Dale Rubin is conditionally appointed, pending court consultation with the I.C.D.A.[California Bar Assn, Indigent Criminal Defense Appointments].

Gargiulo’s desire for a different counsel comes true, but not based on anything he did. Dale Rubin is advanced as the attorney of record. Rubin has to present a budget to defend the case to Dept 123 and get it approved. He also has to find a co-counsel for second chair. Rubin will need to review all of the people’s discovery to date.
These next steps will take time and delay he case.

Note: The full details of the theft from Lindner's client trust account and who was responsible will not be revealed until early in 2019 when defense counsel Dale Rubin files his non-standard 995 motion to dismiss the case (and reply motion) and the 995 motion is argued in open court.

November 5, 2015 - December 16, 2016
Dale Rubin has several appearances in Dept. 108 and in Dept. 123 to get a budget approved and find co-counsel. 


5/27/16 Department 123: Dale Rubin and his co-counsel Daniel Nardoni appear before Dept. 123, Gargiulo’s 987.9 judge for a closed hearing.

7/14/16: Defense co-counsel of record is Daniel Nardoni.

11/21: Sometime before November 21, Judge Ohta is moved from Dept. 108 to Dept. 123. A new judge is assigned to Dept. 108. The people file an affidavit of prejudice against the new judge in Dept. 108, the Honorable Judge Lisa B. Lench. The matter is set in Dept. 100 for assignment on 11/28.


11/28/16 Department 100: Counsel for the people and defendant are all present. Court transfers the case to Department 106, Judge Larry P. Fidler and orders parties to Dept. 106 on December 16, 2016.
12/16/16: Case is continued to March 17, 2017.


Delay #6
The people's request for a new judge delays the case. The Gargiulo case is moved from Dept. 108 to Dept. 106, Honorable Judge Larry P. Fidler. Judge Fidler’s case load is already extensive and Gargiulo’s case is low on the totem pole in this new court. Judge Fidler’s calendar is backed up for months. This transfer delays the case for more than a year.


March 17, 2017 - January 12, 2018

3/17/17: The case is continued until June.
9/8: Due to Judge Fidler having potentially back-to-back death penalty cases, the Gargiulo matter is scheduled for trial on January 12, 2018.

1/12/18: Gargiulo amends his plea to add not guilty by reason of insanity. 

Delay #7
Gargiulo’s additional not guilty by reason of insanity plea delays the case for another year. Trial is expected to start in January 2019.




Note: This means there will now be three separate trials to the Gargiulo case. First will be a trial to determine if Gargiulo is guilty or not. If Gargiulo is found guilty, then a trial will be held to determine if Gargiulo was sane at the time he committed the murders and attempted murder.  If Gargiulo is found sane, then there will be a third trial to determine punishment of life without parole or death penalty. The prosecution is now entitled to see the medical file and psychiatrist notes on every visit Gargiulo had with his doctor. The people are also allowed to have Gargiulo examined by their own mental health expert. All this will take time.



November 2, 2018

Delay #8
Judge Fidler’s packed calendar bumps the Gargiulo case to start March 19, 2019.
Jury selection starts in the Gargiulo trial on March 19, 2019.

Note: I was able to attend the Opening Statements on May 2, 2019. I'll have my notes up in a few days.

Saturday, April 27, 2019

Michael Gargiulo Case: Status Update April 2019

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, Arrested 6/6/08.

April 27, 2019
Here is a status update on the pending Michael Thomas Gargiulo murder trial.

Charges
Gargiulo is charged with two murders (Ashley Ellerin 2001, Maria Bruno 2005) and one attempted murder (Michelle Murphy 2008). Evidence of another alleged murder, Tricia Pacaccio (1993 Glenview, IL) will be presented as 1101(b) evidence, prior uncharged acts (in California). On July 7, 2011, Gargiulo was charged with first degree murder in the death of Tricia Pacaccio by the Illinois Cook County State's Attorney.

Trial Schedule
Opening statements are scheduled to start Thursday May 2, 2019.  Testimony will start on Monday, May 6. No live streaming of the trial will be allowed. Although the court announcement did not mention it specifically, I expect this also covers live tweeting. No photography or filming of witnesses.

The trial will be held four days a week, Monday through Thursday (9:30 a.m. to 12 noon; 1:30 p.m. to 4 p.m.) and is estimated to last six months. The court will be dark the first week of July and for any other court needs.

Media
For opening statements, closing arguments, verdict and sentencing (if necessary), filming and still photography will be allowed. The court is allowing laptops to be used for note taking only.

T&T
I have followed the Gargiulo case for over 6.5 years from my first post on August 21, 2012. It was inconceivable to me back then that it would take almost 11 years to bring Gargiulo to trial.  Sadly, due to the recent changes in my life and the length of this trial, I will be unable to cover this case in the depth and detail that makes T&T what it is. I will not even be able to attend opening statements. I will try however, after the trial has started, to drop in on testimony in May or June as my schedule permits.

Note: I am still trying to obtain a copy of the defense response motion to the people's 1101(b) motion regarding the murder of Tricia Picaccio. I will upload motion documents as I obtain them. Sprocket

Friday, March 1, 2019

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, Pretrial Hearing 47

The previous post on this case can be found HERE.

Michael Thomas Gargiulo

UPDATE 3/12: See below & edited for typos. Sprocket
March 1, 2019
This is a short post to let T&T readers know that I attended the pretrial hearing today. Judge Fidler denied the defense non-standard 995 motion to dismiss the case. Jury selection will start with jurors receiving the jury questionnaire on March 19, 2019.

I hope to have a full update on today's proceedings by next Tuesday. I was not able to obtain documents today and hope to get them by Monday.

There is the possibility that while jury selection in the Gargiulo case commences, I will be covering a civil case in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse. 

March 12, 2019
I'm still trying to get a copy of the defense non-standard 995 motion, supplemental non-standard 995 motion as well as the defense response to the people's 1101(b) motion. As soon as I obtain these documents, I'll update everyone on what happened at this hearing.
More to come....

Friday, February 15, 2019

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, Pretrial Hearing 46

The previous hearing on this case can be found HERE.

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, booking photo
June 2008.

UPDATE 2/23: Corrected Gargiulo's age.
UPDATED 2/16: Edited for spelling errors, clarity. Sprocket
February 1, 2019
I was late getting out the door this morning. It now takes me a hour-and-a-half to get to court via public transportation. I arrive on the 9th floor of the Clara Shortridge-Foltz Criminal Justice Center about 10 minutes before 9 am. I know Judge Fidler's courtroom opens at 8:30 so I head inside.

Lead defense counsel Dale Rubin is in the well of the court. CBS 48 Hours producer Greg Fisher is in the gallery sitting in the back row with Christine Pelisek, People Magazine reporter. I debate on whether to sit with them. I like to sit in the second row. I hate sitting in the back row because I cannot hear as well. I decide to sit in the third row in front of them, so I can still chat.

There is a bit of conversation between the press and Mr. Rubin, who is quite reticent about talking to the press about his client. Anything but that. All he will mention is, when he was supposed to retire in 2017 -Gargiulo is his last case- and where he would like to move to, out of California. Over the last few years, I've observed Rubin to be a friendly man and have had a few conversations with him. He gets along very well with the prosecution. He also speaks and interacts with Gargiulo respectfully. I'm betting that goes a long way with the defendant.

8:55 AM
Deputy District Attorney's Dan Akemon and Garrett Dameron enter Dept. 106 with Retired Sheriff's Detective Mark Lillienfeld. I've known Detective Lillienfeld for a long time. I saw him testify in the first Phil Spector trial and the second. He gives me a big smile and says hello.

A few minutes later Defense attorney Dan Nardoni enters. There is now a huddle in the well between the two teams as they confer over documents. I note that Nardoni has on a nice black suit. My eye is drawn to the red and black handkerchief in his suit pocket.

Over at the clerk's desk, Wendy, Judge Fidler's clerk for as long as I've been covering trials is not here. There is a man who is sitting in for her. There are two extra deputies in the well besides the bailiff. Behind me, I listen in as Greg and Christine chat about other cases they are covering. Not a single one rings a bell with me.

9:07 AM
The court reporter comes out to take her seat in the well. I stand up to look in the jury box. There are no notebooks on the jury seats which leads me to believe Judge Fidler is not in trial at the moment. Attorneys come in for other cases.  A Judge in robes I don't immediately recognize strides into Dept. 106 rather quickly. He asks the stand-in clerk at Wendy's desk if he can have a few minutes with the judge. I know most of the male judges on the 9th floor. Judge Coen, Judge Marcus, Judge Perry, Judge Fidler, Judge Lomelli, Judge Pastor. If the Judge was from this floor, I'm thinking this is Judge Curtis Rappe, in Department 103 but that's just a guess.

9:13 AM
Another defendant is brought out. He's a smallish man wearing a blue jumpsuit.

9:14 AM
Judge Fidler takes the bench.

The first case is continued to another date. It's over quickly. Then a second case, with no defendant present that takes less than a minute.

Then the Gargiulo case is up. The clerk asks DDA Akemon if counsel wants to confer with the court first. DDA Akemon responds, "I think we need the defendant out."

Gargiulo comes out. He looks much like he did last time. His head is completely shaved bald, like it has been for several years now. He has a mustache that is still dark and a goatee that is almost completely white.

The first issue discussed is the defense 995 (Penal Code) motion to dismiss. Rubin tells the court it is a non-statuitory motion. There are documents attached. The motion has not been argued yet. That motion is set for Friday March 1. I have been waiting since 2012 for this motion to be presented and argued.

Next up, 1101b. DDA Akemon addresses the court. The people have several 1101b (Evidence Code) motions before the court and asking for rulings today. The first is a motion to introduce the Tricia Pacaccio murder that occurred in 1993 in Illinois. The motion was filed in 2013. This motion was also litigated at the preliminary hearing. It's a 55 page motion. The people have nothing to add to the motion at this time. The second 1101b motion is a knife attack on Ashley Green. It's a 20 page motion. The people have nothing to add to that motion. The third 1101b are statements made by the defendant during the Perkin's Operation [at the El Monte jail]. The people filed a 55 page motion.  Mr. Gargiulo filed a response. The people don't have anything further to add. 

The people's prior motion of introducing a signature expert, former FBI profiler Mary Ellen O'Toole is discussed. The people inform the court that they are not going to utilize Ms. O'Toole. The court asks the people what the basis for introducing her. DDA Akemon tells the court that the people believe they have ample [basis? argument?] to support this evidence.

Nardoni tells the court that the arguments in the people's motions 1101b motions come from Ms. O'Toole. 

I believe it's DDA Akemon that informs the court that in the Pacaccio murder, they have 19 points of similarity [to the California charges].

Nardoni argues that the 1993 murder of Tricia Pacaccio adds nothing to what the government already has to identity and intent.  "...but clear in this case that the Tricia Pacaccio case adds nothing further to the government case." Nardoni goes back to the Ashley Ellerin case. The defendant knew her and she lived close by. Maria Bruno, [they lived in] the same complex. The have a bootie found in the courtyard with the victim's blood and DNA and alleged epithelial [cells, touch DNA] to the defendant. Nardoni asks the court, "Is identity really an issue in this case?"

Nardoni continues with his arguments, shifting to victim Ashley Ellerin. Ellerin was stabbed 47 times. "Is that really an issue? [Maria] Bruno was stabbed 17 times. Her breasts were cut off. ... Is intent an issue?"  Nardoni then mentions Michelle Murphy. "The problem of introducing under the facts of this case ... unduly prejudicial on this case, particularly in the guilt phase. ... I believe the introduction of Tricia Pacaccio [murder] is evidence of propensity, all covered by 1101a."

Judge Fidler asks about the guilt phase. Judge Fidler mentions Pacaccio and Gargiulo, "...they grew up together."  Nardoni responds, "Killing [his] best friend's sister ... is really identity an issue? It isn't. ... [The] facts speak for themselves."

Nardoni then addresses the 1101b for Ashley Green. It was filed August 8, 2017. The Ashley Green incident occurred in 2002. Nardoni continues to argument that the facts of that incident don't fall under 11l1b. "He lived in the same complex. It happened in broad daylight ... by the door. ... Other incidents .... evening hours. ... He takes from his pocket, a 3" folding pocket knife. ... He gives it to her and she opens it up."  It's related to self defense. It may have been inappropriate but does it go, call for intent and identity. Nothing material. Nothing related. Nardoni adds, "Nonsense to talk about intent and identity on a pocket knife."

Judge Fidler asks the people to respond [for the record] and also address about admissibility.

DDA Akemon responds. "The 1101b issues were articulated [and litigated at preliminary hearing]. .. Nineteen similarities between Ashley Ellerin and Tricia Pacaccio attacks. ... We believe we met that burden under the [Dewalt?] analysis. ... We've met the standard of admission on Tricia Pacaccio. ... Mr. Gargiulo has pled not guilty by reason of insanity. So, 1101b is also relevant to his state of mind, in particular to plan and premeditate. ... I think we can add that as an area of relevance in the Ashley Green attack."

Judge Fidler asks, "How so?"

DDA Akemon responds, "So geographic ... lived near and around ... a knife to the throat. ... [There are] seven to eight similarities to other attacks to other women."

Judge Fidler asks the people to comment on Gargiulo's admissions. Judge Fidler brings up the alleged statement by the defendant, "They're looking for me for a murder in Chicago."

Mr. Rubin interjects and explains what he believes the court is referencing. Then DDA Akemon clears it up for the court. That there was an individual arrested in Chicago, regarding statements by Gargiulo here. The court asks, "Is that coming into evidence here?"

DDA Akemon responds that there are two individuals, a Temer Leary and Anthony Dilorenzo, former friends of the defendant who worked with him in 1998. Statements to the effect of, "I left that bitch for dead... or something similar. ... So the answer is yes, we plan to introduce [those witnesses at trial]."

Nardoni asks to add more to his rebuttal argument. He looked over the Ashley Green motion. "The people say that Mr. Gargiulo attacked Ashley Green. ... simply not true. ... She never reported to police, or assaulted by knife to police." Nardoni continues to argue that it does not go to intent.

Gargiulo is leaning forward, listening intently to Nardoni argue.

Nardoni argues that with the Pacaccio murder, "... we're talking about a trial within a trial. [The] relevancy is outweighed by the prejudice."

Judge Fidler asks for the spelling of Tricia Pacaccio's last name.

Mr. Rubin then steps up to argue against the 1101b motions. This is unusual. It's been my experience the court only allows one attorney to argue a motion, not two.  Mr. Rubin argues the point of the evidence as to the way the crime was performed, other than the fact that Ms. Pacaccio was killed with a knife. Ms. Pacaccio lived a couple blocks around the corner from the Gargiulo family. Her murder occurred outside the door to the house that leads to the driveway. "[The house] is on a corner. ... Anywhere you stand you can see what's going on in that area. ... It's not similar to other attacks. ... The one thing we really have, is to get in front of the jury another murder, what he's also charged for."

Judge Fidler asks, "Is [your argument] the set of similarities or any dissimilarities, you can't use it? Mr. Rubin responds, "I use a fingerprint, or you can't use it by the court. When [Gargiulo's?] case was investigated, ... there were a number of other cases that ... (he was not involved in) ... the prosecution said, a number of steps. I don't know what that means. ... But some circumstances could be related to any other murder of this type."

Mr. Rubin continues his argument that, if the Tricia Pacaccio case is brought in, that means another four weeks of witnesses. Then Mr. Nardoni gets up to continue arguing another point relating to the Pacaccio murder that is different than the other cases.

Again, to me, this is unusual that two defense attorneys are both presenting motion arguments on the same issue.

Mr. Nardoni states that it is believed at the time of the [Picaccio] murder, right across the street, there was a late hour party with alcohol. "That factor detracts from [a] signature." Nardoni adds, "There were several suspects in the Pacaccio case that ended up committing suicide."

DDA Akemon presents rebuttal statements about the "level of proof" in the Pacaccio murder. "His [Gargiulo's] DNA is on Pacaccio's fingernails ... and the witness statements." DDA Akemon references Mr. Rubin's comments about signature needing to be a "fingerprint." DDA Akemon continues, "... Tricia Pacaccio and Ashely Green ... the issue of intent. Those are admissible because they are sufficiently similar."

The court signals in it's first comment how it plans to rule. Judge Fidler responds, "[I] feel differently to Ashley Green. I'll let you introduce Tricia Pacaccio. ... What's sufficiently similar ... knowledge of [individual?] victims ...  proximity of victim and place ... and use of knife as a weapon. ... That satisfies the law. ... I don't think it's unduly prejudicial. ... Facts of crime ... even with DNA ... I've seen cases.

Judge Fidler then references the Juliana Redding murder that was in Judge Kennedy's court, alleged to have been committed by Kelly Soo Park, who is now in his courtroom on another case/charge.

Judge Fidler explains, "... there was DNA on a victim in a case in Judge Kennedy's court, and I have the [same] defendant in another case." (Kelly Soo Park was acquitted in the Redding murder. Sprocket)

DDA Akemon responds that he understands about Ashley Green. I believe he adds that he doesn't know if the defendant will testify. He doesn't know what the mental experts will say.

The Perkin's Operation motion is brought up by Mr. Rubin. "I reread the Perkin's motion. I think it's important to note in Perkin's, the Supreme Court decided ..." Mr. Rubin reads directly from the court ruling. I don't write all of this down. It's not new argument presented by Mr. Rubin, it's a published decision of the original Perkin's.

Gargiulo intently watches Mr. Rubin present the Supreme Court's ruling on Perkin's. Then Mr. Rubin goes on about what happened in the Perkin's Operation in Gargiulo's case. "Forty-eight hours of tape where Mr. Gargiulo is barraged by witnesses. ... [They said to him] Don't listen to your lawyer. You can talk to us! Gargiulo was not in his house. He was in a custodial situation so under pressure at the time. ... If we consider what the prosecution did in this case ... it is so far out side (the issue of Perkin's) ... Also, Gargiulo was on medication at the time."

Rubin states that Gargiulo was in custody, Perkin's was not. "I believe we have a fifth amendment violation and outside of Miranda. ... if not required to give Miranda because of custody setting and also because of outside of contact with his counsel."

DDA Akemon rebuts the defense oral arguments. "He [Gargiulo] did have contact with his counsel. ...I would emphasize, that Mr. Gargiulo was so comfortable ... he was sleeping and had food. ... There were two [officers with him]. ... He was so comfortable in that setting ... not only did he hatch a plan of escape ... he was trying to recruit the other deputies to go in with him."

Mr. Rubin responds. "I didn't hear anything from the prosecution about, Don't listen to your lawyer. You can talk to us." Mr. Rubin continues with more reading from the higher courts decision on Perkins. "The court has long held that there are certain interrogation techniques that are so offensive that they ..."

When Mr. Rubin is finished, DDA Akemon tells the court the people have nothing to add. Then Judge Fidler gives his ruling. "The defense did a good job pointing out specifics in this case. ... I don't see where they broke down the will. ... I don't see it. ... It may come close to the line ... but it didn't cross it." 

Judge Fidler rules the evidence from the Perkin's Operation will come into the trial. The court calendar is set as zero of 60 as of today's date.

DDA Akemon states they are asking for a trial date of March 18, 2019.  That date is agreed to by all parties. Judge Fidler does tell the parties that he has a hearing on March 15th, (I believe in the massive insurance fraud case) a motion to disqualify the prosecution in that case.

The jury questionnaire is discussed. The people and the defense have been working on that. It's about 99% completed. The court asks if they are going to have a  pre-screening of time hardship waiver for the jurors. The court brings up a motion filed by the people about the security of the courtroom.

DDA Akemon tells the court that they are looking at a three phase trial [guilt, sanity, punishment] lasting four months. To be conservative, four to six months. Mr. Rubin asks about possibly sequestering the jury. The court responds, "...probably not."

In conclusion, the 995 motion will be argued on March 1 and jury selection will commence on March 18.  And that's it.

Sprocket Notes
At the time of this posting (February 15, 2019), Gargiulo's birthday, he is 43 years old. He has been in custody waiting trial 10 years, 8 months. A future post will attempt to answer why it has taken this long to bring Gargiulo to trial.

Unfortunately, at this time I do not know if I will be able to cover this entire trial.  I hope to be enrolled in classes for the summer session.

The next post on this case can be found HERE
.

Thursday, November 15, 2018

Michael Gargiulo, Pretrial Hearing 45

Previous post can be found HERE.

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, Arrested in June, 2008

November 2, 2018
Personal Update:

It's been a few days since I vacated my home of 21 years. I am in temporary housing until the end of December. Luckily, I chose a place where I can still take the Orange Line to the Red Line to get to the downtown Clara Shortridge-Foltz criminal court building.

The 9th Floor
8:31 AM
I'm the first person attending this case on the 9th floor. There are barely 8 people spread out along the long hallway. There are attorneys going into Dept. 106, Judge Fidler's court that I've never seen before. There must be another hearing beside Gargiulo's today. I suspect Gargiulo's hearing will not be first up on the schedule.

There is a pretty young girl on the floor obviously waiting for Dept. 106 to open. She might be a reporter or an intern with the DA's office.

8:45 AM
Second chair defense attorney Daniel Nardoni arrives in the hallway. I also see lead counsel Dale Rubin down at the center of the hallway, entering Dept. 103 or 104. Mr. Nardoni approaches a woman he recognizes on the floor and they chat.

8:50 AM
DDA's Dan Akemon and Garrett Dameron arrive on the floor. They stick their heads into Dept. 106 to check in with Judge Fidler's clerk, Wendy, to let her know they are here.  I overhear someone ask if Mr. Rubin is in Dept. 106. As always, Mr. Nardoni says hello to me, addressing me by name.  A few minutes later, Mr. Rubin comes down the hall from Dept. 103. The hallway is still very empty. Hardly any traffic. It doesn't appear that there is a single courtroom on the floor that is currently in trial.

8:52 AM
I head into Dept. 106 say hello to Wendy and take a seat. I pass the defense and prosecution teams having a very friendly chat in the ante chamber. It's very refreshing to see all the attorneys on both sides of a case treat each other with respect and deference. From what I've observed over the years, DDA Akemon and Mr. Rubin have known each other for some time and get along quite well.

There will be another hearing before Gargiulo's. Gargiulo's case will be heard at 10 AM.

9:10 AM
Mr. Nardoni enters and greets the court reporter. There are several other attorneys here for the other case, which is a multi-defendant case.  Mr. Rubin is in the courtroom. When he takes a seat, I notice his pink and blue large check-patterned socks.

9:27 AM
The other case, they are going to bring the defendant's out.

9:33 AM
Judge Fidler takes the bench. The three defendant case - possibly two trials or even three separate trials. The entire matter is held over to December 7th. And that's it. Judge Fidler is off the bench.

For the first time, I notice that there is a sanitary soap dispenser on the wall where the door to the custody area is. The dispenser is directly under the courtroom clock.

9:40 AM
There is a quick court review of a wire-tap hearing. For those of you who don't know, Judge Fidler hears and rules on, I believe, all the requests for a wire tap in Los Angeles County.

In the well of the court, I see DDA Akemon passing a document to Mr. Rubin and Mr. Nardoni. It appears the defense is officially receiving the document. Mr. Nardoni responds to DDA Akemon, "Thank you Daniel."  Mr. Rubin is mentioning something to Wendy about bringing a cart from home to place behind the defense table to hold all the files they will be working with on the case.

I see DDA Akemon dropping off a document at the clerks desk. I overhear a quick comment, "No rush." It has something to do with witnesses.

The chatter I'm overhearing at the clerks desk is a March start date for the Gargiulo trial. My heart sinks. One of the cases in the prior hearing is likely to be next up on Judge Fidler's calendar to start in January. Judge Fidler's calendar rules everything else. From what snatches of conversation I'm hearing now,and from what I believe I heard the clerk discuss with other counsel in the prior hearing, one of the three defendants in that case, is not in the greatest of health. The goal is to get his case to trial as quickly as possible. That's why Gargiulo will probably go after that case.

9:45 AM
Gargiulo is brought out. He is completely clean shaven except for a very small mustache. The green bag he carries with him is placed on the floor at his feet. He's wearing his black, horn-rimmed glasses. He looks much the same as he has in prior hearings.

9:48 AM
Judge Fidler takes the bench for the Gargiulo matter. The defense 995 motion is first mentioned. I've been waiting for the defense to present their 995 motion back in 2013, several attorneys ago. For those not familiar with a 995, it is a defense motion to dismiss the case. It's usually the first motion filed after the completion of the preliminary hearing. Judge Fidler asks if they wish to argue. Mr. Nardoni speaks for the defense on two motions by the people to admit evidence: the 1101b DNA evidence in the 1993 Illinois murder of Tricia Pacaccio and the People's Perkin's Operation

Mr. Nardoni briefly states that the court is well aware of Illinois v. Perkins (a ruling affecting Miranda when undercover agents are placed in a jail setting). Mr. Gargiulo was at the LA County jail (in LASD custody) when he was brought to another city jurisdiction, and placed in a cell with two undercover agents. Mr. Nardoni argues that this Perkin's Operationin Gargiulo's case was different than the usual encounters. "He was taken out of the cell and grilled. ... put back in the cell ... taken out again a grilled by LAPD and Downey police." In the people's response, they state Gargiulo had the benefit of a toilet and sleep.  Mr. Nardoni argues the People's Perkin's Operation goes beyond a Miranda type issue. Mr. Gargiulo was not given medication he required. "They took undue advantage of him." 

Mr. Nardoni then argues that, over counsel's objection, the Tricia Pacaccio evidence that was admitted in the prelim under 1101b. He argues that the Pacaccio case, as it is related to the other homicides, there is nothing that relates except the stabbing. Mr. Nardoni argues the evidence is not unique enough. 

Ashley Ellerin murder in February 2001. Nardoni argues, "Easy to say but for Pacaccio, he would [never?] been held to answer on Ellerin alone. ... There's no evidence on it's face. ... The last time [Gargiulo] was seen in the area [of Ellerin's murder] was around November 2000." From January 1st to her [Ellerin's] death he was never seen in the area. There was no DNA No footprint match. No hair fibers or anything to connect [Ellerin's murder] to Mr. Gargiulo.

With the Pacaccio evidence, they [people] are able to prove identity as it relates to Pacaccio, and they are trying to piggyback Ellerin case onto that.

Judge Filder asks to hear from the people. DDA Akemon informs the court that back in December, the people dismissed the burglary charges. I believe DDA Akemon informs the court that these issues were litigated before the prelim,  ruled admissible and it is not proper to relitigate them here. DDA Akemon goes over the basics of the preliminary hearing: 10 days long; 46 witnesses and 37 exhibits. There are over 1,221 transcript pages. In conclusion, the people had Gargiulo connected to three [attacks] and evidence of violence against three other women. Very compelling circumstantial case.

Mr. Nardoni tells the court that he thinks Mr. Akemon misspoke. We have DNA in Pacaccio. She was found at [her] doorstep at home, outside. Others, the attacker broke into apartment[s]. Mr. Nardoni mentions the Bruno case and that in the Murphy case, the same incident the attacker broke in. "Ellerin, that's not a break-in." Detective Small testified all the windows were secured and could not determine any point of entry of the residence or someone [had a] key to the entrance. Mr. Nardoni states that there were two other people who had keys to Ellerin's home: her roommate and the manager. The Ellerin case is unique. There's no DNA in Ellerin or any other physical evidence.

Judge Fidler rules. "I believe Judge Johnson had more that enough evidence..." The court mentions the 1101b and Perkin's Operation. The motion to dismiss is denied.

Mr. Nardoni tells the court, "We need a trial date." Then the case that has been in Dept. 106 for the past nine months is mentioned.  The 12 defendant preliminary hearing in the medical insurance fraud case is the one involving Kelly Soo Park. My notes are not clear on who makes the comment, 'That hearing has got to be coming to an end.'
The court tells the parties that another case will go before them in January. It's not a death penalty case. It will be tried in two separate trials and be six to eight weeks for each. There is one defendant that they need to get to trial first. The other defendant could possibly go after the Gargiulo case. Wendy reminds the court that Mr. Rubin is waiting to retire. I silently note that Mr. Rubin has been waiting to retire since 2017. The Gargiulo case will be Mr. Rubin's swan song.

A return date is finally selected: February 1, 2019 with the case calendar set at zero of 60 on that date. There is speculation that the other case could fall through and not go to trial in January. DDA Akemon, Mr. Rubin and Mr. Nardoni confer. They ask the court if there is a date in December that they can return. Wendy states there are no dates available in December. Judge Fidler's calendar is packed.

Mr. Rubin addresses the court. In 2016 Judge Gordon assigned the case over to him once Mr. Lindner was relieved. Mr. Rubin was assured the case would go to trial in 2017.

Judge Fidler tells the parties that the 12 defendant trial [prelim?] is a disaster.

DDA Akemon tells the court that they are in agreement with the defense. They are hoping not to lose their place in line.  The clerk tells the parties there is no November date available either. Judge Fidler asks to speak to Wendy for a second. DDA Dameron tells the court that whatever date, the February 1, 2019 date would be for arguing the 1101b and Perkin's motions. The February 1st date is locked down.

The court addresses the defendant. "Mr. Gargiulo, is that agreeable to you sir?" Gargiulo responds, "Yes."

The court states they will litigate both.

Then the issue of a jury questionnaire is discussed. Mr. Rubin informs the court that the defense does not want one. They want to have individual juror questioning in voir dire.  Mr. Rubin tells the court a name of the type of questioning, I have "...Hobi preferred" but I don't know if that's the correct term. Mr. Rubin wants to question jurors individually on their feelings on the death penalty vs LWOP. Mr. Rubin states again he is against a jury questionnaire. He prefers a capitol exam.

The court responds, "If you would like to make a formal motion.... I'm disinclined." Judge Fidler recommends to the parties to prepare a jury questionnaire.

And that's it. At 10:10 AM Gargiulo rises from his chair. The sheriffs pick up his green bag and hand it to him. Mr. Nardoni goes back into the custody area with him. About five minutes later, Mr. Nardoni comes back out of the custody area.

Outside in the hallway, I ask Mr. Rubin for a moment of his time. As polite as he has been over the past three years, he appears a bit irritated by my request. I explain that I am an independent journalist who has covered this case since 2012 and am hoping that he would be willing to share copies of his motions with me. 

I don't mention to him that I am hoping he will be willing to share copies of his motions because as an independent journalist, my budget to purchase them from the court is very limited.

Mr. Rubin flatly declines. He tells me I can purchase copies of his motions from the court. I then ask him if he and his co-counsel would be willing to sit for an interview. I make it clear to him that I would not be asking about the case but to do a profile on them as defense attorneys.

Mr. Rubin's tone changes. He is quite adamant in saying no. He tells me he never cooperates with the press. He does not speak to the press. He mentions several major networks by name that have contacted him on the case. Mr. Rubin tells me he never cooperates or sits for interviews. He says that I can go online and find out everything I need to know about him.

Mr. Rubin's response is disappointing since I will have to explore other avenues for getting copies of any defense motions. I know I will not be able to purchase them all. However from a defense standpoint, Mr. Rubin's policy of not cooperating with the press benefits his client the most.

Looking back, I find some irony in all of this. Over the years, I have been contacted by a few people who knew Gargiulo.  Some have shared information. Some have not.

In June of 2015, I was contacted by a woman who stated she was in phone and letter contact with the defendant. She knew him from high school. This was during the time that Gargiulo was represented by Mr. Lindner and it was clear from the pretrial hearings that Gargiulo could not stand his counsel, refused to cooperate, was trying to get a new counsel assigned and was unsuccessful in that endeavor.

The individual stated that Mr. Gargiulo wanted me to contact him via letter and possibly meet with him in the private attorney area to discuss the court proceedings with him. The individual stated that Mr. Gargiulo thought that the judge [At the time, this was Dept 108, Judge Sam Ohta] and his defense attorney were "...being deceptive in court and he feels that he is involved in a wrongful case." I respectfully declined.

As an independent journalist with limited resources, T&T has had a long standing policy of zero contact with potential trial witnesses or charged defendants while the case is pending. Anytime someone has contacted me on a pending case, I always check with the assigned Deputy DA's to see if the individual who has contacted me is on a witness list or someone on their radar.  Some journalists might ask, How could you pass up the opportunity to sit and talk to Gargiulo? To me, the answer is easy. My goal has always been to report on the story as an observer. I don't want to become a part of the story and end up on the witness stand myself.

Uncertain Future for Trial Coverage

I was hoping that the Gargiulo case would go to trial in January and take the estimated five months for three trials: guilt, sanity and penalty phases. I had originally hoped that I could continue reporting on T&T for another year, but things have changed for me. That's not going to be possible. I will need to return to employment much sooner than I had originally projected. I was hoping that in June after the case was finished, I could brush up on my computer skills and look for work in my prior field as a compliance auditor in the financial industry.

With this trial starting in March or even later means after covering the case since 2012, I probably will not be able to continue T&T and cover the Gargiulo trial without an additional source of income at the same time. Possibly a sponsorship if I can find one or trying to raise funds through a Go Fund Me campaign.

So unfortunately, at this time, things are uncertain for continued trial coverage into 2019.

The next post on this case can be found HERE.