T&T Update on Several Cases

UPDATE 1/23/15 Dawn DaLuise case
UPDATE 1/21/15 spelling, clarity
January 20, 2015
Hope all is well with everyone in the new year.

This is just a short post to let T&T readers know that I haven't dropped off the face of the earth and forgotten about covering cases. One of my main priorities is being the financial manager for Mr. Sprocket's business. Through November and December, I helped Mr. Sprocket put together some difficult proposals for his business and I'm helping with another difficult proposal this month, too. Additionally, the December holidays are the busiest time of year for my home business.

A big Thank You, to those of you have inquired about how Mr. Sprocket is doing since his heart attack last May. He's actually doing quite well. He's only gained three pounds since losing over 30 in the ICU. His latest blood work tests were pretty good considering where he was six months ago.

Here are some short updates on the cases I'm covering as well as a new trial I'm going to cover in the next week.

Cameron Brown - Next Hearing: 1/27/15
To recap, Brown is charged with first degree murder in the November 8, 2000, death of his 4 year old daughter, Lauren. Prosecutors allege Brown threw his daughter off of Inspiration Point, a 120ft cliff in Rancho Palos Verdes. Brown has had two hung juries and will be going to trial for a third time.

Although I had to miss the last two pretrial hearings in the Cameron Brown case, I believe I will be able to make the next one on January 27th. Last time I dropped in on the case, a trial date was tentatively set for April 2015.

Michael Gargiulo 1/9/15
Gargiulo is charged with a total of seven counts and is facing the death penalty. His charges include two counts of murder, one count of attempted murder and one count of attempted escape. At the November pretrial hearing, Gargiulo relinquished his pro per status. Charles Lindner has been reinstated as defense counsel.

I'm still working on getting my notes finished for the last hearing on January 9, 2015. The next pretrial hearing in Gargiulo's case will be March 20, 2015. As of the January 9 hearing, the status of Gargiulo being able to have massive amounts of court documents with him in his cell hasn't been resolved yet. There will be more on that, in my post that I hope to have up in a few days.

Dawn DaLuise 1/12/15 - UPDATE
DaLuise is charged with one count of murder for hire. Opening statements started on January 9, 2015.  I missed the first day of trial since I was covering the Gargiulo hearing downtown. I attended the second day of trial on January 12, when the prosecution presented their first three witnesses. Local ABC 7 covered the case with well known sketch artist, Mona Edwards providing visual color for their on air reports. You can read a bit of their trial coverage and see some sketches at this link. Unfortunately, I was unable to attend any more of the trial. According to the DA's calendar, closing arguments will be presented tomorrow. It's a good bet the jury will get the case sometime in the afternoon on Wednesday.

1/23/15
On Thursday, January 22, a jury found Dawn DaLuise not guilty of attempted murder. According to ABC Channel 7 article:

Dawn DaLuise, a former model and skin care business owner, was arrested in March 2014 for allegedly trying to contract former NFL player Chris Geile to murder rival business owner Gabriel Suarez.

During the trial, Geile testified that he was a shoulder to cry on for DaLuise, but that he never thought she was trying to solicit him to commit murder.

The ABC story has video of DaLuise with her attorney, Jamon Hicks after the verdict.

Rafael Enrique Martinez, Jr. 1/13/15
After the Gargiulo hearing, Deputy District Attorney Daniel Akemon mentioned that his next case, a cold case, would be at the Van Nuys Courthouse, Dept. V.

People v. Martinez is scheduled to start on January 26, 2015 and is expected to take about three weeks with an additional 3 to 5 days for jury selection. Although I dropped in on a case or two this past year, the last trial I covered from start to finish was the Kelly Soo Park trial in 2013. This would be a chance to cover a relatively short case close to home. The first trial I ever attended was at the Van Nuys Courthouse. It was the Robert Blake trial back in 2004-2005, long before the start of T&T.  One of the reasons I'm interested in attending this trial is the fact that the defense has informed the court that the defendant is expected to take the stand and testify in his own defense.

Rafael Enrique Martinez, Jr., allegedly a member of La Eme, is charged with 187 felony murder in the deaths of Nancy Boehm (pronounced "Beem") and her son Shawn in a North Hollywood neighborhood back in September 1997. It's my understanding that Shawn, 23, was autistic with the mind of a 12 year old. He was often seen by neighbors riding his bicycle around the neighborhood.

Martinez was already serving a 14 year sentence in prison for voluntary manslaughter when he was identified as a suspect in these murders. The prosecution will introduce evidence that Martinez's DNA was found under Nancy's fingernails. Here is an LA Times article that give a few facts of the case and Martinez's arrest in November 2009.

I attended a pretrial hearing in the case on Tuesday, where Judge Susan Speer ruled on several defense and prosecution motions in limine regarding the admissibility of evidence. Judge Speer is an atractive, bespeckled woman with short, blondish straight hair that stops above her shoulders.

Rafael Martinez is represented by Tom Burns with the Alternate Public Defender's Office. Mr. Burns is a slender man with gray hair. When I arrived, I made sure to check in with the bailiff and to ask if Judge Speer allowed journalists to use laptops for note taking only. She does. When DDA Akemon arrived, it was evident that several of the deputies in Judge Speer's courtroom were happy to see him. One female deputy told me that they miss Mr. Akemon. He used to work in the DA's Van Nuys office, Hardcore Gang Division. It's my understanding that DDA Akemon has tried a few cases before Judge Speer before.

1/20/15
I was back at the Van Nuys Courthouse again today, for Judge Speer's rulings on defense motions to admit evidence of third party culpability. One of these motions overlapped a prosecution motion to exclude certain evidence. When I arrived on the 8th floor of Van Nuys West I got a surprise. In the hallway was none other than former DDA Alan Jackson. Many of you may remember Jackson from the Spector case as well as the James Fayed case. Jackson is in private practice now, mostly handling civil matters. I got a hello hug from Jackson and he asked me why I was here. I told him that I'm following one of DDA Akemon's cases. Akemon and Jackson are good friends from when they worked together in the DA's Major Crimes Division.

Inside Dept V, there is a single outlet on the left wall and I grabbed that seat so I could use my laptop. The morning session was entirely taken up by pretrial hearings in other cases.  While I was waiting on the Martinez case, I tried keeping my eye on the door for when DDA Akemon and Mr. Burns would arrive. A few hours into the morning session I looked back at the door and saw one of the Van Nuys Cowboys, Detective Pete Barba. "The Cowboys" were the team of homicide detectives that solved the cold case murder of Sherri Rasmussen and led to the arrest of LAPD Detective Stephanie Lazarus. I caught Barba's eye, gave him a smile and wave. 

After hearing oral arguments from the defense and counter arguments from the people, Judge Speer denied defense motions to introduce evidence of potential third party culpability by three different individuals. Judge Speer informs counsel that she read almost every case before the California Supreme Court and Appeals Court regarding 3rd Party Culpability evidence.

The court then went over every item in detail that the defense wanted to admit and then gave her reasons why that evidence did not meet the standard. Mr. Burns gave a valiant effort in oral argument to defend some of the evidence he was trying to have admitted. The court did rule that the defense will be allowed to introduce the fact that fingerprints from some identified and some unidentified individuals were found in the residence, but she placed limitations on the jury being presented with each and every name for prints that were identified.

Judge Speer then outlined for counsel her general trial procedures. DDA Akemon is familiar but Mr. Burns was not. 16 jurors will be selected for this trial. Since there are only 14 seats in the jury box, two jurors will sit outside the jury box and in the row of gallery seats directly in front of it.

I found it interesting that Judge Speer does not designate alternate jurors at the start of the trial. All 16 jurors will be sworn in as jurors. After the trial is completed and the jurors have been read jury instructions, four juror numbers will be randomly selected from a hat to be the alternates. Judge Speer indicated that she feels this method has all jurors pay more attention to the evidence if they don't know if they will be an alternate or not. This method also gives counsel more preemptive strikes. She explained it to counsel, but I wasn't quite following the details of that.

For voir dire, Judge Speer will go through the hardship questions and then she uses a preset list of questions for the first 16 jurors in the box. Once she has asked each juror her questions on that form, she will open up voir dire to counsel. She indicated she would give 20 minutes to each counsel. Mr. Burns appeared concerned about that short amount of time for the first jurors in the box. Judge Speer uses CALCRIM instructions (verses CALJIC) and she types up her own jury instructions.

One of Judge Speer's pet peeves is running out of witnesses in the afternoons. She reminds counsel to have their witnesses stacked with no more than 30 minute call times.  Counsel confirm to the court that they will not need any interpreters for witnesses.

Judge Speer tells counsel that she does not want speaking objections during testimony. She will make a note of the objections and typically will wait until the next break to argue those objections on the record outside the presence of the jury.  To me, it sounds like this would reduce the number of bench sidebars.

 When Judge Speer is finished, I believe it's the Sheriff's Department that asks for a Wilson hearing and presents a number of inmate discipline reports for the defendant. Judge Speer reads into the record the incidents the Sheriff's Dept. provided on the defendant. These incidents involve the defendant not complying with deputy's orders, difficult situations for the sheriffs involving threatening statements, talking back to deputies, and swearing.  Judge Speer states that the defendant is convicted of voluntary manslaughter, associated with La Eme and that the people are seeking life without possibility of parole. Judge Speer rules there is a manifest need to utilize a type of restraint on the defendant. An invisible stealth belt will be connected to the back of the chair.

The defense objects. Mr. Burns argues, "I don’t believe there’s enough evidence. He’s been coming to court without any disturbance. ... He has every incentive to be a gentleman in the courtroom. ... They (the jury) are going to decide his fate. He knows they're going to decide his fate and he knows this. ... And he's a smart man. I don't think there's any cause to restrain him."

Judge Speer responds, "Mr. Burns, I’ve been in so many courtrooms where it would seem counter productive for a defendant to act out." Judge Speer recounts to the defense her own experiences of having people be injured, stabbed, reporters injured, and her own experience of having to crawl under a desk. She adds that it usually happens outside the presence of the jury.

DDA Akemon replies, "The people concur with the Sheriffs Department on the analysis and request. The incident in custody of violence and other nonconforming behavior, Mr. Martinez's connection to the Mexican Mafia, ... I think there is a manifest need in this case."

Mr. Burns asks about a shock belt being used instead. The Sheriff's representative informs the court that those are no longer being used. Mr. Burns asks to see the stealth belt and the deputy takes out and and shows him how it's used. It is attached around the waist and hidden under a jacket or a pulled out shirt. It's explained to Mr. Burns that with the stealth belt, the jurors will not be able to see that the defendant is restrained to the chair. It is the least visible and the most minimal restraint. The defendant's arms and hands will be free.

And that's it for today. Counsel is ordered back at 9:30 for any last minute decisions. The jurors are expected at 10:00 am.

I will be back for the first day of trial in the hopes that in this small courtroom and a total of 61 fixed folding seats in the gallery, I will be able to attend voir dire. It will all depend on the judge and available seating. I believe the court may have already pre-qualified 75 jurors. That's a lot of jurors to cram into that courtroom.

Michael Gargiulo Pretrial 20 & Cold Case Trial of Douglas Gordon Bradford

Michael Thomas Gargiulo, booking photo, date unknown

EXCLUSIVE T&T Gargiulo Trial Coverage HERE.

Previous pretrial hearing 6/27/14
Friday July 11, 2014
8:10 AM
I'm on the 9th floor of the downtown Criminal Justice Center for another hearing in the Michael Gargiulo case.  As most of you know, Gargiulo is pro per, meaning he is self representing in a death penalty case.  Yes, I know I am behind in getting my trial notes up on Gargiulo's and Cameron Brown's previous hearings, as well as the preliminary hearing of Dawn DaLuise.

Investigator Chris Nicely was already here in the hallway when I arrived.

Earlier this week, the cold case trial of Douglas Gordon Bradford kicked off in Dept. 103, Judge Curtis Rappe's courtroom.  (Larry Altman of the Daily Breeze wrote about the case when the trial started on Monday.) Back in October 2013 at Rick Jackson's Retirement Dinner, I got to speak to DDA John Lewin about when this case might go to trial. At that time, he speculated the case would start sometime in May of this year. He wasn't too far off. I had tried to keep my eye on this case but cases where the defendant is out on bond are a little harder to track. I was hoping I could attend when it started but Mr. Sprocket needed my help on a few jobs earlier this week.  If there is time, I will try to drop in on this trial because I've wanted to attend one of DDA Lewin's cases for some time now.

On the drive in this morning, I was listening to KFI's Eric Leonard's report about the Donald Sterling civil case, over at the Stanley Mosk Courthouse. (Anything involving the NBA is bigger news than a cold case murder.) It appears that case is on hold until July 23.

8:26 AM 
There's quite a bit of activity down at the other end of the hallway.  However, at this end I just saw defense attorney Seymour Amster quickly pass and enter Dept. 106, Judge Fidler's courtroom. Amster is co-counsel on the Lonnie Franklin, Jr., alleged serial killer case in Judge Kennedy's court, Dept. 109. The case Amster might be on this morning in Dept. 106 is a dismemberment case.

8:32 AM
Dept. 108 is open and there are quite a few people from the general public here. I have not seen DDA Akemon or DDA Dameron in the hallway yet.  Attorney's come and go from several of the courtrooms at this end of the hall.

8:37 AM
Judge Ohta's clerk came out and put a sign on Judge Otha's door that they are dark. She was kind enough to let me know that Gargiulo's hearing will now be held in Dept. 107, Judge Lomeli's courtroom.  Judge Lomeli allows reporters to use their laptops so I'm hoping I will be able to use my computer for this hearing.

8:44 AM
DDA Akemon and Sheriff's Detective arrive and stop at Chris Nicely to chat.

8:45 AM
Right afterwards, DDA Akemon asked me how Mr. Sprocket was doing. Mr. Sprocket is doing pretty good. He just needs to build his muscle tone back up.

Inside Dept. 107, I check with the bailiff to make sure I can use my laptop for the Gargiulo hearing.  I can.

In overhearing the conversation between DDA Akemon and Nicely, it looks like they will just put this case over.  Interestingly, Mark Overland and his daughter, Courtney are in the well of the court. Overland defended former LAPD Detective Stephanie Lazarus.

Councilman Richard Alarcon and his wife, Flora Montes De Oca Alarcon, are currently on trial in Judge Lomeli's courtroom on perjury and voter fraud charges. Overland is representing Mrs. Alarcon.

8:52 AM
Another case is called for a pretrial hearing.  In that case, the defense has filed for a 1538 (motion to suppress) hearing and they need to set a date for that.  Defense says it will take 2 hours. September 26th next court date. And that’s it for that hearing.

DDA Dameron is not here today. It's just Akemon and Chris Nicely.  I get to meet the journalist who I saw at the last Gargiulo hearing. It's the fabulous writer, Christine Pelisek who now writes for The Daily Beast.  She’s amazing.  She wrote several wonderful pieces about Lonnie Franklin, Jr., when she was with The LA Weekly.

I was going to drop in on DDA Lewin's case after this hearing but I found out that Dept. 103 is dark today. The Bradford case will resume on Monday. I'll try to come back for that trial a few days next week. It will all depend on whether or not Mr. Sprocket needs my help.

9:17 AM
Gargiulo is handcuffed to a wheelchair.  Two deputies are wheeling him into court via the front entrance. I don't know why Gargiulo is in a wheelchair.  Whenever a defendant is brought to court in a chair, they are not brought into court through the regular holding area between the courtrooms. The deputies use other security elevators to bring in the defendants through the front courtroom doors.

On the record in the Gargiulo case.

Judge Lomeli asks, "I understand that both of you agree to put this over until next Friday?"

DDA Akemon tells the court that he hasn't spoken to Gargiulo directly. He tells the court that Gargiulo is under a time waiver.

DDA Akemon states they are asking to put the case over to next Friday July 18th.

Judge Lomeli tells the parties, "In speaking with Judge Ohta yesterday, it was his intention to set some parameters and deadlines."

DDA Akemon states that they have presented (or filed with the court) their outline for a timeline.

Garguilo then speaks up and tells the court he has an issue. He's trying to seek medical treatment for an injury he sustained in this courthouse. He would like to see an orthopedic doctor. He tells the court that at the jail, "... They're just trying to overdose me on medication. ... I'm trying to see an orthopedic."

Judge Lomeli tells the defendant that he can't write an order for him to see a specialist. "The only person who can do that is another doctor. ... I can refer you to a doctor."

Judge Lomeli asks the defendant if he has filled out the proper form for that. Gargiulo says he doesn't have the form. Judge Lomeli tells the defendant, "When my clerk gets here..." he will get the form for him.  Judge Lomeli asks him to describe his specific complaint. "I'm seeking medical treatment for an ankle injury and a back injury."

Judge Lomeli will set a medical order. And that's it. The next hearing will be on July 18th.

My understanding is, after the last pretrial hearing on June 27th, Gargiulo was taken back to the lower floor jail holding area. His ankle chains got caught in the elevator or the space between the floors in the elevator and he either fell or tripped.

After Gargiulo is wheeled by me I look directly at him. His head is looking down at his lap, possibly reading some papers.  As he leaves, Judge Lomeli addresses his court reporter. "Remind me, ankle and back." She nods her head in reply.

I wonder how long Gargiulo will be in a wheelchair due to his ankle and back injury.  When a defendant is brought into court in a wheelchair, I'm sure it's more interesting for them. They have the possibility of seeing and interacting with the general public because of the short time they are in the hallway.

I head down to the cafeteria to finish my notes then head home.

Post note:
I almost forgot! Gargiulo's head was still bald and his face completely clean shaven.

Next scheduled hearing date is 7/18/14.

Dawn DaLuise Case: Pretrial Hearing 3 - Preliminary Hearing

Dawn DaLuise at a prior court hearing.

UPDATE 6/24: spelling, clarity, grammar, added court ruling on bail reduction request

8:12 AM
I’m on the 8th floor of the Airport Courthouse, waiting for Dept. E, Judge James R. Dabney’s courtroom to open. I was a bit alarmed by the lax security through the security scanners this morning.  It appeared that many employees walked through the scanner carrying items or with bags over their shoulders. They did not appear to be wand scanned afterwards. I can’t be positive, but it also appeared that with the walk through scanner went off for some members of the general public, they were not wand scanned either.

I was the first person on the eighth floor this morning. There is one other gentleman at this end of the hall now, and about three others at the other.

When I left the house at 7:15 AM, I thought I would not get here in time. Traffic was quite jammed up on the 405 South for the first few miles.  Once I got past Sunset Blvd., things opened up. I was already on the freeway when I realized I forgot to take my lunch   that Mr. Sprocket had gotten ready for me the night before.

I have no idea how long this preliminary hearing will go, or if it will even go off as planned today.  Mr. Sprocket has two doctor appointments on Wednesday that will probably take most of the day, and this Friday, are three hearings downtown on the same date in the Cameron Brown, Michael Gargiulo and Alberd Tersargyan (aka Albert Haroutunyan). I won’t be able to attend all three, but maybe I can attend two of them.

8:25 AM
I’m betting that the prelim won’t start until 9 or 10 AM. I wouldn’t be surprised if there are  a few other pretrial hearings that Judge Dabney has to clear before the prelim.

8:34 AM
I'm inside Dept E. Judge Dabney is not on the bench. I'm going to use my laptop to type until it looks like things are getting started.

Someone behind me is whispering my name.Oh. My. God. I can't believe it. It's ALAN JACKSON!!! We step outside to get caught up. Jackson tells me he does miss the DA's office, but he is very happy working on civil litigation cases.

9:04 AM
I forgot to mention that Jackson did ask how Mr. Sprocket was doing.

9:05 AM
No Philip Dube yet. The courtroom gallery is less than one-third full.  There are about twelve attorneys in the well. Jackson, his co-counsel and DDA Amy Carter (pretty, glasses, auburn hair in a ponytail today) are off to my right chatting in the aisle.

There is a video camera set up, most likely for the DaLuise preliminary hearing.  Because the the layout of the courtroom, I'm hoping the camera won't pick up up in the background. The podium is in the center, inbetween the defense and prosecution table, so it is difficult to see the witness.

9:15 AM
Philip Dube arrives. He goes to the interview room to speak to his client.  Jackson greets familiar faces in the courtroom.

9:20 AM
Judge Dabney takes the bench. The first case is called. The defendant is not present.  Second case is called.  It's interrupted while Jackson, his co counsel and DDA Carter approach the bench on their case.  The second case is finished then Jackson's case is called. It's set over for July 8.

Then the Dawn DaLuise case is called. A different attorney steps up. It's not public defender, Philip Dube.   The people filed a motion to continue the case. The prosecutor DDA Steggell is in trial. DaLuise's new attorney objects. DaLuise is not willing to waive time. The new attorney reminds the court that when he was here last week, and took over the case, the court wanted to be sure he was ready for prelim on this date.  The defense is ready. The Judge asks the people if the cases falls under 1054a, or (I believe) family law.  The people respond it does not.

The Judge states he's inclined to decline the people's request. The people state that Mr. Fullerton is ready to step in and try the case for the people. Steggell hands off the prelim to DDA Fullerton. DDA Steggell tells the court that it will take the investigating officer about a half our to get to court. The prelim will resume about 10:00 am. DDA Steggell then speaks to an older, Spanish looking couple seated to my left, and tells them that it will be delayed until about 10:15am.  I'm guessing this is the intended victim, Gabriel Suarez's  relatives.  DDA Steggell then speaks to DaLuise's new attorney, a tall and handsome, younger looking black man.

I follow DaLuises's new attorney out of the courtroom and introduce myself. I ask if he is the new attorney taking over for Mr Dube. He replies yes. I ask if I could get his name or his card. He doesn't have a card on him, but he tells me his name.  His name is Jamon Hicks, of Douglas Hicks Law Firm.

I've got to get back up to the 8th floor.

10:12 AM
I'm back inside the courtroom. Judge Dabney is not on the bench. DaLuise's new attorney, Mr. Hicks, was in the cafeteria working when I left.

T&T readers, this may be the last preliminary hearing that I will be able to attend for some time. I don't know what the future will bring. I don't know where life will take me, but I am going to have to find permanent work of some kind, if Mr. Sprocket and I are to survive and save our house.  If you have appreciated T&T's in-depth trial coverage in the past, consider making a donation.

10:15 AM
The court reporter is over at the bailiff's desk and where a jovial conversation is in progress.  Mr. Hicks arrives with a rolling cart.  There appear to be several people in the gallery for other cases, but I don't know why they haven't been called yet.

10:43 AM
We are waiting for DDA Fullerton to return. Judge Dabney left the bench. I overheard someone in the well state that the witness is still about 20 minutes away.  The man sitting next to me yawns, and it becomes contagious. I yawn in response. It didn't help that I was up until 11:00 pm getting an order from my Etsy store ready to ship out. Very grateful my neighbor is able to drop it off at the post office for me.

10:45 AM
Judge Dabney is still off the bench. DDA Fullerton returns and starts setting up his files. I overhear him tell Mr. Hicks that if he plays the video, it's over an hour.

5:50 PM
Short update here to let you know Judge Dabney's ruling. I will have a full update sometime tomorrow.

Judge Dabney stated that Ms. DeLuise believed Mr. Suarez was responsible for the stalking/ harassment providing for ample motive.  The defendant referenced "taking someone out." She sent the victim's name to Christopher Geile. She sent a photo of the victim's residence (a four-plex building) [and I believe, how to identify the unit]. "It does appear to me that the offence has been commited ... and should be held to anwser."

The defense then argued to have lower bail. The prosecution objected to lower bail stating there was no change in circumstances. The court just ruled that she should be held to answer. The court denied a reduction in bail.

The court sets the arraignment for July 7th in this courtroom. After arraignment, the case will be sent to Matrix Court. (My understanding Matrix court is similar to Dept. 100 in downtown Los Angeles. It's the Master Calendar court.)

I will also add that the defendant made a noteworthy admission during a taped interview LA County Sheriff's Detective Steven McCaulley (after the investigation turned from a harrassment/stalking case to a solicitation for murder) when he confronted her with her emails and texts she sent to various people.

Detective McCaulley, after confronting her with the emails and texts, he advises DaLuise to get some advice before making any other decisions. He reminds her that, ....from February 6th on, when you started talking about taking this guy out."  DaLuise responds, "I know."

My understanding of this exchange in the taped interview, (when I heard it in court and the full exchange) DaLuise admits here, that's what she was trying to do, solicit someone to "take Suarez out."

To be continued Tuesday, June 24.....

Dawn DaLuise Case: Pretrial Hearing 2

Dawn DaLuise in custody March 19, 2014. 

Photo Credit: KTLA Pool Camera

UPDATE 6/23: An earlier version had Judge Dabney's name spelled wrong. I apologize.
May 19, 2014
8:15 AM
I’m on the 8th floor of the Airport Courthouse.  I arrived before 7 AM, missing most of the 405 traffic. Unfortunately, the cafeteria doesn’t open until 7:30 AM so I sat in the lobby to wait.  While I was waiting, I did have a very interesting chat with a woman, a retired minister. She was here for her first experience on jury duty.

My lobby companion lived most of her life in the center of her east coast state. When she and her husband retired, a family member offered them the opportunity to live with them in their home in the south bay area. They jumped at the chance.  They currently live in on the coast and are relatively recent transplants.

I shared with her a little bit about the LA County court system.

8:23 AM
Although there are several people from the general public here, I don’t see a single person from the media. A few people come and try the doors to the two courtrooms on this wing of the hallway.

Just to be sure that nothing’s changed, I check the LA county Sheriff’s inmate locator site again. The date is today and the courtroom is Dept. E.

There is a new sign on Judge Dabney's courtroom door that states no electronic media. It specifically states NO laptops. I'm disappointed.  Wont be able to use my laptop to write.

8:26 AM
I put my phone on silent and try to stretch out my low back.  I was up until 4 AM, helping Mr. Sprocket on a new ductless split system at a bakery.  I slept for maybe an hour before I got up to get ready to come here. I have no idea when I’ll get these notes written up.

8:33 AM
The courtroom opens. People head inside. I debate on whether to get in there to get a good seat, or wait to see if any of DaLuise's family show up.  I close up my laptop and head inside.

Inside, there are signs that indicate no sitting in the first row. I take a seat in the second row, directly behind the defense table. Judge Dabney's courtroom is a mirror image of Department F, next door.  The black female bailiff's desk is to the right. The court clerks desk is along the wall directly beside the curved corner bench.

I believe I forgot to mention in my last notes, that the courtroom ceilings are constructed and a nice, wide arch. Very attractive.

The clerk is at her desk and it is eerily silent in here.  After a while, I start to get a little chilled. I forgot to bring a light sweater. There are several attorneys in the well and three in the lone chairs on the very left side of the gallery.

There is another desk directly beside the clerks desk. Then there is a walkway space to the jail area and the bailiff's desk to the right. There isn't a phone or computer at this desk but there is a file basked and what appears to be an industrial size hole punch or stapler. An attorney stops at the clerks desk to check in. There is a woman seated at the extra desk. She looks like a defense attorney. A Latino woman in the gallery gets up to speak to her.  The woman at the desk replies, "It will be a while."

Another deputy opens the door to the custody area and peeks his head inside Dept. E for a moment they goes back inside the jail area.

8:45 AM
Judge Dabney's court reporter arrives.  On the right side wall next to the gallery there is a large, permanent sign that says "No Food Or Drink In Courtroom."  There are individual fold up seats just like in Dept. F.  Two male attorneys come and go and then enter again.

Just to be safe, I put my phone in 'airplane' mode.


The female bailiff takes a suit of clothes back to the custody area. I start to yawn. I'm hoping I don't fall asleep. I had about a quart of iced tea this morning and a second, hot tea in the cafeteria. I only had sausage and hash hash browns in the cafeteria for breakfast. I was too afraid to have scrambled eggs because I'm still not sure exactly how I got the food poisoning after my last trip here.

A woman enters from the back area, sits in the jury box and is typing on her cell phone. My best guess is that she is a court appointed interpreter.

A defense attorney asks the bailiff if his client could be brought up so that he could speak to him. He is informed he may have to go to another area to see him because they already have some one (back in the private room/cell?).  A minute later he says that's okay, "Where ever."  The bailiff then calls him back to speak to his client.

It's now that I realize there are two ways that defense attorneys can speak to their clients. There is a second door to the custody area in the far back right corner.  It has a sign on it that says "Interview Room - No Cell Phones Allowed." This door does not have a window or one of those special locks on it like the doors behind the bailiff's desk. My guess is, this leads to a room where there is an enclosed "cage" area, much like Dept. 30 downtown, or Dept. 100 at Van Nuys.  I imagine there could be several defendants in this area at once, talking to their attorneys.

I'm guessing that DaLuise's case wont be called early since her family isn't here.

9:03 AM
A female attorney checks in with the bailiff.

9:15 AM
I didn't see him enter, but there now is a slightly balding white haired man sitting in the well seats directly in front of me. Is that defense attorney Pat Harris? I didn't see him check in with the court clerk. It will be a surprise if it is. Pat Harris defended Cameron Brown in his second trial.  Harris was affiliated with Geragos & Geragos for about 15 years or more. Now he has his own practice.  I attended most of Brown's second trial. I became ill right after the defense case started and missed several defense witnesses.

The defense attorney stands and faces the gallery. It is Pat Harris. He's known for defending Susan McDougal and co-authoring a book about it. I address him. "Pat Harris." He looks at me, but he doesn't recognize me. It has been a while. I add, "Betsy Ross, Trials & Tribulations." He smiles. He's surprised to see me. He replies that it's been six years.  I inform him that his former client is now pro per and still in custody.

It's my understanding that Brown earns "good time" credits while in the LA County Sheriff's custody. I believe (but I'm not positive), that he earns 1 day for every two days served in county.  He's been in county custody over 10 years. If Brown got convicted of second degree murder, it's possible he could be eligible for parole after he's sentenced.  It doesn't mean he will get parole, it just means he's eligible.

9:20 AM
Philip Dube, (pronounced Due-bay) DaLuise's public defender is her. I don't see any family. Dube comes out from the jail area carrying some magazines. He hands them to a gentleman in the last row, sitting on the other side of the courtroom. The man is older, gray hair and a beard. I don't believe he was here last time. If he was, I didn't see him. I hear Dube tell him that DaLuise is not allowed to have magazines while in custody.

It's my guess that one of the reasons that magazines are now allowed is because of the staples that could be used to hold them together. I can see the face of the magazine that was on top: People.

Judge Dabney takes the bench. He has mostly black hair, slightly balding with a grayish mustache and small beard. The first case is called. A defendant in an orange jumpsuit is brought out.  While this case is heard, Pat Harris and Dube get up from the well and chat beside the right wall in the gallery. Now I'm wondering how Harris is associated with the case.

I've become fascinated with the unusual lock on the door to the jail area.  It takes a huge, flat key that's on a ring on the bailiff's waist. From where I'm sitting, the key looks like it's three or four times the size of a normal door lock key.

Harris paces back and forth in the well. When the first case is over, Harris addresses the judge. He tells the court, "My is a witness who was ordered here today." Harris' client is Edward Feinstein, who is not in the courtroom. New discovery was provided to the defense late (last night? Friday?) and it's going to be held over.  The judge orders his client back for the next hearing.

That's it for Harris. He takes off.

It appears that Judge Dabney wanted to call the DaLuise case but her counsel can't be found. Someone tells the court that he needed a few more minutes with his client.

Another case is called in the mean time. A defense attorney tells the court that his client changed his mind and decides to take a plea on count 2.  The defendant takes a plea on a charge of assault with a deadly weapon.  He pleads no contest. Judge Dabney makes sure that the defendant understands his rights and that he is giving up his rights by pleading.

9:50 AM
Judge Dabney leaves the bench. Mr. Dube passes an envelope to the gray haired friend of DaLuise. I hear him say, "These are some cards and letters."  I don't think that DaLuise had these cards and letters in her possession and gave them to her attorney. My guess on what happened is, Dube may have been able to share these items with his client in custody, or he returned them to DaLuise's friend because he was unable to share them with her.

The courtroom is back to that eerie pin drop silence.  There are only eight people in the gallery.

10:05 AM
DDA Heather Steggell, who is prosecuting the DaLuise case, returns. I believe Dube is still with his client. My notes are not clear, but I think Judge Dabny is back on the bench and asking if they can do the DaLuise case. He's told that Dube is still with his client. The bailiff gets up to check.

DDA Steggell gets up and goes to the 'Interview Room' to ask Dube if they can call the case. Steggell has a three defendant plea next door.

10:17 AM
Mr. Dube comes out from the interview room.  Judge Dabney and counsel talk about future dates off the record. They want to set the case at zero of 10 on June 23.

Judge Dabney calls the case: SA086704. DaLuise is brought out. I believe she has a waist chain, or is cuffed at the waist somehow. She quickly looks in the gallery and smiles at her friend in the back row.  Dube tells the court, "Friday, I received a large packet [of discovery] from the people and apparently more is to come."  Judge Dabney asks, "What is it?" I believe it's Steggell who answers. "Analysis of computer and phones from the defendant." She continues, "There are other witness phones (and computer?) ..." that still need to be analyzed. She tells the court that the report on the defendant's computer and phones is "pretty substantial. ... There is one witness computer in the process and possibly a second witness."

Judge Dabney rules that he wants everyone back on June 9th. The 9th doesn't work for Dube. Dube offers Friday the 13. Judge Dabney replies, "I'm not superstitious."  DaLuise lets out a little giggle or laugh at the courts comment.  Dabney orders Edward Feinsten, the prosecution's witness to be on call for the 13th and ordered back on the 23. And that's it. As DaLuise is taken back into custody, she turns to the gallery again. Smiling at her friend she lifts her palm up slightly to give him a wave.

After I leave Dept. E, I head up to the 9th floor to see if Judge Deborah Brazil's courtroom is open. I'd like to drop in and say hello. The door is locked so I make my way back home.

Dawn DaLuise Case: Pretrial Hearing 1

Dawn DaLuise in custody March 19, 2014. 

Photo Credit: KTLA Pool Camera

UPDATE 6/23: An earlier version had Judge Dabney's name misspelled. I apologize.
UPDATE 5/24: An earlier version of this story included the first names of two family members of the defendant. They have been removed at the request of the defendant's family. 
It is not known if anyone went to authorities about the stalking or who notified authorities about the murder for hire plot. Sprocket.
April 18, 2014
You may have heard about the Dawn DaLuise case that unfolded in early March 2014.

DaLuise, a skin care specialist and owner of Dawn DaLuise Skin Refinery in West Hollywood, California. DaLuise who catered to celebrities and had been featured in several magazines, including Vanity Fair, was arrested March 5th by the LA County Sheriff's Fraud & Cyber Crimes Bureau. She's charged with 'murder for hire' of Gabriel Suarez, a competitor who in 2013, opened up his skin care business, "Smooth Cheeks" in the same building (8543 Santa Monica Blvd.) as DaLuise.

I heard about the case about a week after the arrest from a long time girlfriend (I'll call her 'Pat,' not her real name), who was a client of DaLuise. Pat relayed the story much as it was explained in the LA Times and a segment of the ABC 20/20 episode that aired April 11th.  A witness, Edward Feinstein, is alleged to be the individual who did the actual stalking of DaLuise. He is out on $150,000.00 bail.

According to Pat, DaLuise told her that someone was stalking her. The stalker had taken out suggestive, rape fantasy ads on Craigslist with DaLuise's photo, phone number and home address.

Pat was in shock that DaLuise was arrested and the fact that her bail was one million dollars. I explained that the high bail amount is the standard minimum whenever there is a murder or attempted murder charge against a defendant.  The fact that DaLuise was still in jail only meant that she has not been able to make her bond yet, not evidence of her guilt.

Backside, exterior view, LA County Airport Courthouse

I checked the LA County Sheriff's inmate locator web site and discovered DaLuise's case was filed at the Airport Courthouse.  This courthouse, which opened in February 2000, is a relatively new building, as far as court buildings for LA County go. I had never been there, so I thought it would be a good opportunity to see the building and sit in on DaLuise's hearing.

Getting to the Airport Courthouse required leaving the house almost an hour earlier than when I leave for downtown, so I don't hit any traffic on I-405. Once I found parking, I got breakfast in the Cafeteria. The security station on the main floor doesn't open until 8:00 AM. When I get in the security line, it's quite long. It has wound the length of the long lobby hallway three times. Fortunately, the line moves pretty quickly.

The Courthouse has nine floors and thirteen courtroom. At the end of the long lobby there are four glass elevators in a half circle, which are visible in the above photo. One of the elevators has a sign in front that states it's not in use.

When I get to the 8th floor, there’s a sign on Dept. E, Judge James R. Dabney's court, that the courtroom is dark, and all calendar matters will be held in Dept. F, Judge Mark Windham’s courtroom.

A cameraman with a tripod is here with a thin, blond reporter with ABC 20/20. I don't recognize her but she remembers me. I met her at the Kelly Soo Park trial. She is kind enough to give me the correct spelling of the defense attorney, Philip Dube, with the Public Defender's office. 

The DA's case calendar indicates the prosecutor assigned to the case is Heather Steggell.

There are less than a handful of people in the beautiful glass and tile building.  The floor tiles are an alternating pattern of off white and black & green squares surrounded by cream rectangular pieces. The walls are tiled using the same colors in large 12x24 inch tiles.

A red haired woman wearing a leopard print blouse walks down to this wing and checks the door on Dept. E. I'm checking our her red leather handbag. I say to her, "You here for Dawn?" She takes the cement bench beside me and replies that she is and asks me if I know Dawn. She is a friend. I tell her that I don't know her, that I'm an independent journalist.

The red haired friend gets up and hugs a pretty younger woman. She also greets a middle aged man. I hear her say the man's name. There are a few other supporters here. An older black woman that the younger woman hugs.  An eclectic group.  In the hallway, I chat with my friend Pat who tells me that this might be Dawn's ex-husband.

8:34 AM
The courtroom opens but no one heads inside. A suited gentleman with a badge walks by.

9:04 AM
I finally enter Dept. F and take a seat beside the blond reporter in the first row. She points out Dube to me. I continue to use my laptop in court since the judge is on the bench and no one has told me I have to close it. I see Dube head into the jail custody area to speak to his client but he comes back out quickly. There is a little window in the door to the jail area. The bailiff's desk is right in front of the door. It appears Dube might have a clerk with him, a very young looking man. No, I'm wrong.

9:13AM
The courtroom is not set up like a typical courtroom with the bench in the center of the back wall. This courtroom is different. The wood bench is a quarter circle in the back left corner. The back wall is wood paneling with a small State of California seal in the center, just like the ones I've seen on the lower floors of the downtown criminal court building.

The gallery seating are individual fold up seats with seat and back cushions. They're not bad. The fabric covering the seats is a muted blue with tiny lighter gray squares. All the courtroom decor is complimentary to the overall building design and colors.  The counsel seating in the well area is quite nice, too. All the chairs have a wood trim across the high backs. You can see one of the chairs in the photo of DaLuise.

The four people here for DaLuise are on the other side of the courtroom and a row or two back. From left to right they are, the black woman, the young woman, the possible ex-husband and then the red headed friend.

The ABC and I both wonder if the young woman in court is one of DaLuise's two daughters. DaLuise has posted photos of her daughters, as well as their names and ages on her Twitter account. I can't tell from where I'm sitting if it is one of her daughter's in the gallery, but it's a good bet.

9:16 AM 
Judge Mark Windham comes out and takes the bench. He's wearing glasses. The bailiff asks everyone to stand. Court is now in session.

The walls that divide the well from the gallery are much higher than the downtown courtrooms. My laptop can't be seen from the bench and the bailiff doesn't ask me to close it.

Another case is heard first. It's put over over till tomorrow. A second case heard. The ABC reporter tells me that Mr. Dube is not in the courtroom at the moment. Counsel come and go. There are about five DA’s in the well and three defense attorneys.

Second defendat is brought out.  It's a death penalty case. It's put over for another date. The people don’t oppose a continuance.  Time is waived continued to May 2.

Third defendant brought out from custody. This is a sentencing. Appears that circumstances were, for the defendant to pay certain amount of victim restitution or sentenced to180 days in jail. Caltrans on probabtion violation paid part of it. There are some reports missing but the defense attorney says they have a plea transcript. There is no probation report. The defense attorney waives that. Grand theft. Probation for three years. Defendant to serve 180 days in LA County jail. The defendant's good time credits are outlined. 100 days credit against 180 days. Restitution $2,157.00. The defendant paid $1,000.00 last November 12. The court (claimed? indicated?) on February 25, the defendant paid $500.00 more. The defense attorney states his client did not pay that. The parties are working out the specifics. The people agree.

I look on over at the jury box. There appear to be 14 or 15 seats in three rows.

A fourth case is called that requires a Spanish language interpreter. It's a 3 count arraignment. Defendant pleads not guilty and denying all special allegations.  The cameraman sets up his camera in the jury box.

9:30 AM
A fifth case is called. The defense and people state their names for the record. The DDA is Ms. Walker. There are new occurrences.  The interpreter returns to her seat in the jury box, first row.

I note there are some beautiful tall wood file cabinets against the wall right beside the jury box, with a few plants on top. The California State flag and US flag are on poles on each side the State of California seal. The witness box sits in between the flags and under the state seal. This is where one would normally find the judge's bench.  The court reporter's desk is directly in front of the witness box.

A sixth case is called. I can't pronounce the defendant's name. He's wearing the LA County jail's new pale, lime green jumpsuit. There is an admission the defendant violated his probation.

9:36 AM
The youngish looking man that was speaking to Dube is Matthew A. King, an attorney with the State of California, Dept. of Justice, Office of the Attorney General. He is here to plead to the court to have DaLuise's Esthetician License put on hold/ revoked pending the outcome of the trial.

Earlier I saw the young woman that might be one of the defendant's daughters leave the courtroom for a time. Now she's back.  She comes over to the ABC reporter sitting next to me. She confirms the reporter's name. She introduces herself. She say's her name. It is one of DaLuise's daughters. She hands the ABC reporter a subpoena.

The reporter doesn't understand why she is being subpoenaed. This probably has something to do with the ABC 20/20 segment. I tell my reporter friend to contact her legal department as soon as possible. I'm surprised the reporter was served in open court, while the judge was on the bench. I've never seen that before. I thought it couldn't be done while court was in session, or even inside a courtroom but another reporter friend tells me it's legal.

9:55 AM
Mr. Dube enters the courtroom and then goes back to the custody holding area again.

I note that the clerk's desk is against the left side wall, directly beside the judge's desk. I'm trying to describe the side walls but it's difficult. They look like 2 feet by six feet, fabric covered panels in an off white color. They have a bit of a three dimension to them. From far away, they look like stone. There is a large sign on the side wall over the jury box, identifying the seat numbers.

Judge Windham stays on bench inbetween cases. He doesn’t go back in chambers when there is a lull in the courtroom.

10:15 AM
My laptop battery ran low so I had to switch to hand written notes.
More cases are called, but not DaLuise. It looks like there is a DDA permanently assigned to this courtroom to handle cases.

10:23 AM
Judge Windham asks if they are ready for DaLuise. DaLuise is brought out and her case is called. Judge Windham goes on the record.

Mr. King from the State of California. He's talking about protective orders. If the defendant makes bail, I believe King is asking for conditions be set on her bail that she not be allowed to practice. Dr. Conrad Murray's right to practice medicine in California was suspended pending the outcome of his involuntary murder trial. I will be surprised if the judge doesn't grant the State's request.

The prosecutor is not here at the moment. The DA assigned is in trial ... the defense waived time previously. The DA arrives. She is in trial in Dept. C.  I believe she tells the court that's scheduled to last through May 9th.

Judge Windham sets a date of May 12th for the prelim. That date is fine for the prosecution but the defense is in trial on that date.

I see that DaLuise has her right hand on her face, her elbow resting on the arm of her chair.

The judge goes over the defendants rights. The defendant has two rights, three really and prelim may not be unduly (violated?). There is a 10 day right then a 60 day right. These were waived for further investigation and discovery.  Further, there would be the right of reasonableness.

It appears the case may be continued without some other statute providing the defendant not waived the 10/60 rights.

DaLuise turns around to look at the gallery.  Judge Windham asks about a date of May 19th. Both parties agree. The court clock will be set at zero of 10 on that date. The case will be continued to that date.

I have in my notes Judge Windham, citation for People v. (Love?).

The people request a protective order for Garbiel Suarez, Elaine Suarez, Maria Suarez and Angel Suarez. I believe that's granted.  Judge asks to hear from Mr. King. King filed a motion on revoking the defendant's license to practice.

I have in my notes that (Pub?) cannot represent her on this motion. Judge Windham states, "As I understand ... the Attorney General may intervene in a case." It's not clear in my notes who says "... I'm not acting as a licensing agency..."

I believe Judge Windham continues, "... as a condition of bail, is a legitimate concern. ... Were this a purley civil issue, I'd understand ... concern. ... The way the Attorney General described ... is described in broad terms."

I believe DaLuise's defense attorney argues that this is a matter of bail and probation ...

There's more argument back and forth I believe, between the court and Mr. Dube. Judge Windham states, "I'm not going to consier limiting it in any other way. ... completely within bailwick as condition of bail. ... to protect the general public."

She occupies a position of great public trust.  Liken this to Prop 9.  (Victims?)  I see state of intervention in bail issue for purpose.  I'm not going to delay hearing and order to submit.

I believe Mr. Dube continues his arguments.

In setting bail, not aware of any condition to allow court to factor in employment. ... We are pre conviction. ... To strip her pre conviction is to consider her guilty. ... It will bar her from earning a living.

Mr. King states, purpose of setting bail is to protect the public.  I believe King brings up people v. Gray. The court can exercise that power and set as a condition of bail, suspension of practice or less (constrictive?) conditions of bail.  ... The prosecution alleges that defendant solicited murder against another Esthetician. ... Condition of bail ... she should be suspended from practice.

Judge Windham thinks his authority is clear to set a limit if bail is met.

This right is protected by preliminary hearing. If defendant should not be held to answer, then the issue is moot.

Mr. Dube argues the standard of proof, is a lighter burden (at prelim). Standard of the prelim is probable cause.

This is all moot if she remains in custody.

Judge Windham rules. "I think the public should be protected. ... risk to public. ... Temporary suspension of her license. ... Feel it is appropriate."

The amount of bail stands. If she makes bail, she is not to practice cosmetology and obey the protective order.  I believe the court asks if there is any other discovery from the people.  The people respond, "At this point, no."

The defendant is taken back into custody. And that's it.  Next hearing is May 19. The date for the prelim will most likely be set on that date.

I wait in the hallway for Mr. King to exit so I can get his business card. After that, I make my way home.

Links
Dawn DaLuise Website (Appears to be suspended)
Dawn DaLuise on T.witter
Dawn DaLuise on Facebook

Mainstream Media Reports
03/07/14 LA Times - Skin care expert to stars charged with plotting to kill rival
03/07/14 TMZ - Ex Detroit Lions Player Suspected Hit Man in Murder for Hire Plot
03/12/14 ParkLaBreaNews - WeHo spa owner arrested in murder for hire plot
03/13/14 LA Times - West Hollywood skin care guru wanted to kill rival
03/1314 CBS4 - Witness Arrested for Cyber Stalking Rape Threat that Led to Murder for Hire Plot
03/14/14 People - Celeb Facialist Ordered Hit on Wrong Guy
04/11/14 ABC 20/20 Video Report

Michael Gargiulo Case: Pretrial Hearing 17A

 Michael Thomas Gargiulo, in custody

UPDATE 5/18: edited for clarity, spelling

May 9th, 2014
8:05 AM
I’m on the 9th floor of the downtown Los Angeles Criminal Justice Center, sitting at the end of the left wing. It’s virtually empty in the hallway this early.

Backstory: Gargiulo's Last Pretrial Hearing
The last time I attended a court hearing was on April 17th at the Airport Courthouse. I have notes I still have to write up about the case of Dawn DaLuise, who is charged with attempted murder for hire.

After that hearing, I got home around noon and realized I had food poisoning. After 12 hours of pain, it left me flat on my back and out of sorts for almost five days, which is why I missed Gargiulo's last hearing on April 18th.

At Gargiulo's previous hearing on March 7th, stand-in defense attorney, Charles Lindner was ordered by Judge Ohta to appear on April 18th. My understanding is, Lindner did appear on the 18th. At that time, Judge Ohta still had not reviewed Gargiulo's subpoena's in camera.

May 9th, 2014
8:06 AM
A few minutes after I arrived, Gargiulo's defense investigator Chris Nicely arrived.  He’s wearing a nice dark suit jacket and slightly lighter gray pants. Most other times I’ve seen him, he’s worn sweater vests. It’s been a hot spring for Los Angeles so far this year, so I’m not surprised that Nicely switched to wearing a jacket.

8:19 AM
Down in the center of the hallway I see defense counsel for the Joshua Woodward case. Megan Wisegerber,  Kelly T. Currie are standing. It’s a guess that Janet Levine is sitting. I keep leaning forward to try to see if it’s her, but since she's on the same side of the hallway that I'm on, I can't tell from where I'm sitting.

The hallway is filling up with people at the other end.  It is Ms. Levine who was on the bench. She got up and I was able to see her face. They are waiting for Dept. 103 to open. I’ll miss that hearing this morning.  After Gargiulo, I’ll have to find out when the next pretrial hearing is for that case.  (Readers, you can always check the listing of 'Upcoming Pretrial Hearings' in the right column for cases you are interested in. Sprocket)

Nicely is sitting to my left. I glance over and see that he is reading some hand-written pages on lined paper. Looking back down the hallway, I can’t see as far as I used to. I’ll have to get my prescription updated.

One news event that I’ve been obsessed with the past two months has been the disappearance of flight MH370.

8:26 AM
The activity in the hallway has quieted down a bit.  I keep glancing left to see if the prosecutors from the Woodward case (DDA Marguritte Rizzo and DDA Habib Balian) have arrived yet. Woodward’s defense attorney’s are still in the hallway.

8:31 AM
I see one of the Woodward prosecutors, DDA Marguriette Rizzo walk this way.  She’s wearing that cream trench jacket with the big buttons down the back that I really like. She gives me a smile and heads into the ladies restroom.

Over at Department 107, Judge Lomeli steps out and unlocks his own courtroom door. Coffee cup in hand, he's wearing his standard suit vest.

8:39 AM
Down at the center of the hallway, I  see DDA Habib Balian has arrived. He's chatting with Woodward’s defense team. Then everyone steps into Dept. 103.

8:48 AM
LA County Sheriff's Detective Mark Lillienfeld arrives. He smiles and says hello. He then greets a man at the end of the hallway and they chat.

8:49 AM
Chris Nicely gets up and enters Dept. 108.

I unplug my computer from the wall outlet and close up my laptop. I follow him inside a few moments later.

8:50 AM
After I take a seat in the second bench row, investigator Christian Filipiak arrives. We exchange greetings and then he goes over to chat with Chris Nicely. Then the both step outside the courtroom.  Getting back into taking hand notes after I've been away for so long is hard.

I note that there is another deputy with Judge Ohta's bailiff at the bailiff's glassed in area. They both appear to be deeply focused on their cell phones. Judge Ohta's clerk comes out of the back area. She sees me, smiles and says hello.

8:55 AM
Detective Lillienfeld enters and takes a seat in the well.

A handsome bald man comes out from the back area carrying two soft sachels. It suddenly dawns on me that this is Judge Larry Fidler, who presided over the Phil Spector trial.  It's a good guess that he used the private elevator on Judge Ohta's side of the building. To me, Judge Fidler doesn't appear to be as tall as what I remembered when I sat in his courtroom through two trials.

Detective Lillienfeld heads out to the hallway. The clerk hands a package of juror notebooks to the bailiff. Wondering if Judge Ohta is in trial at the moment, I stand up to see if there are notebooks on the seats in the jury box. No notebooks on the seats.

9:05 AM
Another deputy arrives telling the other two about an event this Sunday.  Moments later, DDA Akemon arrives.  Detective Lillienfeld is back and Akemon compliments Lillienfeld on the deep green color of his suit.  I agree. It is a nice suit.

DDA Akemon and DDA Garrett Dameron leave the courtroom to have a private chat in the ante chamber.

9:08 AM
The pretty, black female deputy arrives. She has three stripes on her shoulder, but I don't know what rank that represents.  The four deputies are discussing a report about Gargiulo. Something happened on the way back to Men's Central Jail at his last hearing on April 18th.   I overhear one of the deputies say the DA wants to increase security involving Gargiulo.  They mention Gargiulo's pro per status.  Now the bailiff from Dept. 107 comes in and they share their information with him. Another statement I overhear is, "... apparently he's a trained boxer ... he has an issue."  Another says, "... so far ... he's pretty cooperative."  I hear them mention an escape attempt. The female deputy is reading a document and another deputy tells her about the El Monte jail incident. Another deputy with two stripes arrives.  I overhear statements that sound like, 'DA wants to increase security because of what happened when he came back from court ... and the handcuffs."  During this conversation about Gargiulo, I observed one of the deputies touch his fingers to his lips in describing the event.

9:16 AM
Judge Ohta's pretty court reporter comes out and sets up her equipment.

9:19 AM
DDA Akemon and Gargiulo's investigator chat at the defense table. Akemon places papers on the defense table and they appear to discuss them. There are three stacks of papers. One stack is over an inch thick.

I believe Akemon tells the investigator he laid out a timetable at the last hearing of a potential trial date of April 2015. There's one document that Filipiak asks Akemon if Gargiulo is entitled to have a copy of. I hear Akemon reply that he doesn't know but he'll find out.

DDA Akemon and Detective Lillienfeld leave the courtroom. I believe they left to make copies.

9:25 AM
Gargiulo is brought out. There are four deputies in the well, watching him. I have to move a little farther down on the bench row to get a clear view of Gargiulo.

Gargiulo chats with his investigators. Judge Ohta comes out in his robes. He sets papers and files on his bench and starts to go over some of the files.  Judge Ohta works on a file at the bench.  Gargiulo is still going over the papers at the defense table with his investigators.

9:30 AM
DDA Akemon returns and Judge Ohta goes on the record with People v. Gargiulo. The defendant is before the court, representing himself. He asks the investigators and the prosecutors to state their appearances for the record.  Judge Ohta tells the parties, "There are several things to take up today. ... One relates to (discovery?) [The SDT's] and one relates to pro per privileges. ... [We'll] take pro per status first. ... I received a document, filed on May 1. Before this document (was?) filed with the court ... (the) Sheriff's department faxed to the court notice that a Wilson hearing had taken place on (April 25th?)"

Based on the notice the court received and the documentation filed by the Sheriff's, it would appear that the Sheriff's Department proceeded with a Wilson hearing. The defendant was in violation and his pro per jail privileges were taken away.

Judge Ohta continues, "Before I go further, the allegation of jail (weapon? contraband?) is a crime. ... You have a right against self incrimination." Judge Ohta continues informing Gargiulo of all his rights with this allegation.  "You have a right to have the court review what happened. ... and (the?) basis of the sheriff's action against you. ... I don't know if a case will be filed against you regarding the 'shank' ..."

Judge Ohta then proceeds to read into the record the local rule 8.42, that requires certain things be done and note for the record what has been done so far.

Judge Ohta goes over what the documents he's read, appear to indicate what happened.

Gargiulo appeared in court on April 18, 2014. Apparently, on the way back to jail, Gargiulo was searched. Deputy (Pace?) found a metal object hidden in your mouth. On April 21, a (discovery?) hearing was conducted and you were found guilty."

Gargiulo was disciplined and put in "the hole."(I believe Gargiulo was put there for 10 days. Sprocket)

Judge Ohta continues, "Then you were given a Wilson hearing on April 25. The hearing officer found you were in violation of two sections of the pro per rules."

The first violation was possession of a metal object (or "shank" or "key").
The second violation is a duty not to infringe on the rights of other pro per status inmates.

Consequently, a notice to the court was faxed on April 28 of the action taken. The court filing was on May 1.

Judge Ohta goes over local rule 8.2. The court explains that the local rule is not legislative mandated. It sets forth certain procedural rights that need to be followed.  I believe Judge Ohta is reading a section of the local rule into the record.

1. Notice must be given to you (defendant) 24 hours in advance of a hearing.
2. You have a right to appeal within 48 hours.
3. You may call witnesses.
4. You must be given a copy of the evidence relied upon.

There are certain timing requirements, and this is after receiving notice.
There is a review of the sheriff's decision and then a calendar hearing scheduled to present evidence.

Judge Ohta tells the defendant, "That is what we're doing right now."

Gargiulo replies, "I'd like to speak on the record. The jail failed to follow all the rules. ... I can't prepare because (my?) privileges were violated. ... I filed an appeal and they failed to follow rules and reply in three days. ... There are so many rules they violated by taking me to segregation immediately."

Judge Ohta asks the defendant, "Are you saying that what's in this document is false?"

I miss Gargiulo's reply. Judge Ohta states, "What you're saying is, the notice given to you ... they failed to follow procedures (before?) the Wilson hearing?"

Gargiulo argues that they did not follow proper procedure. "They denied me the right to prepare. ... They did not give me documents until one day before the Wilson hearing. ... I filed a ton of complaints ... that have not been responded to."

Judge Ohta asks, "You're telling me you're not prepared?"  Gargiulo responds, "I have no privileges."

Judge Ohta explains to Gargiulo, "The way California court explains this is done, varies from county to county.  ... Once pro per status given ... the evidence hearing does not have to happen here. It can happen at the jail. ... Only at the point of court review of what happened and the court then determines modifying your privileges. ... What you say happened before ... may not have anything to do with the Wilson hearing. ... The Wilson hearing is separate. ... The memorandum on pro per privileges could be modified. ... They've already been modified by the sheriff's."

Judge Ohta asks Gargiulo what date does he want to return. "You're not going to get your pro per privileges ... You have no law library privileges, but you're entitled to have a hearing. ... You're entitled to present your (position? evidence?)"

I believe it's at this point that Gargiulo tells the court that he doesn't understand how there are two violations. He doesn't understand the second violation.

Judge Ohta patiently explains to Gargiulo, "The sheriff's position is this. If an inmate has a shank, who knows where that shank may travel. ... (It could be) taken to the law library. Other inmates are in jeopardy. ... Their rights are infringed upon."

Gargiulo responds, "That would be based on speculation..."  The court replies, "You could call it that if you like."  Gargiulo asks, "Where would I get the discovery? ... The DA's office?"  Judge Ohta replies, "Not the DA's office. It's the County Sheriff. ... If you're going to allege all things against the (sheriff?) ... I think we can do this in a week. ... The DA's office may not appear. ... You [the DA] can if you like."

A week from today, Judge Ohta will schedule a review of the Wilson hearing on May 16th.  Judge Ohta orders the counsel for the Sheriff's Office to be here on that date.

Judge Ohta then moves onto the other issue. He's gone in camera to review Gargiulo's SDT's (subpoena duces tecum). The DA asked the court to keep certain concerns in mind. I miss what Judge Ohta gives as the first concern, but it's probably personal witness information. The second concern is any material from members of the prosecution team; LA County Sheriff's, El Monte PD.  Judge Ohta looked at envelopes from AOL, Match.com, Monterey Police Dept., LA Co. Sheriff's Dept. He did not find anything from (Mark Monitor?).

The material from AOL and Match.com, nothing that triggered any of the DA's concerns. The defense investigator will be given the material, make copies and return one to the court.

LA County Sheriff's: Sent out five SDT's. Sheriff's department launched a letter from (their? counsel?) citing 1054. "This is discovery and you need to ask prosecution."

Monterey Police Dept. There was a tape given to the court. This is ostensibly ... one of the issues of DA Akemon ... but not for Monterey Park. The defense will be given the tape and make a copy and return to the court.

Judge Ohta concludes, "And that's everything with respect to the defense SDT's. ... I believe the DA filed a request for discovery from the defense. ... We talked about setting parameters ... a time frame. ... Right now, the pro per privileges are suspended at the end of the Wilson hearing.  ... If I go along with the Sheriff's Dept., and the defense is restricted, you have to make a decision if you want to continue to (represent yourself)."

Gargiulo asks about his phone privileges.  Judge Ohta responds that the court is not required to go along with every single one of the restrictions. ... I don't know if having a shank is necessarily ... You have a right to have a hearing. ... County counsel will be here." Gargiulo asks the court, "Are you expecting a motion?"

Judge Ohta replies, "I don't expect (a motion?).  You dont' have privileges. ... Anything connected to your ability to pro per (privileges), phone, pencils, paper ... is all a privilege."

I'm not sure if Gargiulo asked another question at this point or not.

Judge Ohta continues, "I don't see it (impending?) ... Depending, ... (you?) can possibly have phone privileges back. ... Jail security is (primary?) with the sheriff. They have complete power. Not me."

This review hearing will be next Friday.

Akemon then tells the court that he has turned over to Gargiulo another set of discovery.  I miss the first page number, but the last page number was 27,060.  Gargiulo has in his cell with him, 27,060 pages of discovery from the prosecution.

There's something mentioned about DNA results from SERI that was put on a CD and given to Gargiulo's investigators.

Based on the allegations by the LA County Sheriff's, the prosecution filed with the court a memorandum of manifest need to provide increased courtroom security.  (It's my understanding that the DA's move here is to protect the public. They need to have their position on the record. Sprocket)

Judge Ohta gives his thoughts on this issue. "...finding of manifest need ... pertains to (?) and fact finder (jury). ... We don't need to worry about this until time of trial ... and doesn't impede on Mr. Gargiulo's rights."

I have this exchange in my notes, but unfortunately, I'm not sure who says what. It's possible the court asked the question and Gargiulo responded, or it could be the reverse.

Do you have anything for me?
There's a lot on my plate.

Garguilo then tells the court, "I do have a (question?). I did file a motion with the court regarding defense turning over discovery, stating I didn't have any discovery at this time. Still trying to locate witnesses and interview witnesses."

I believe the court tells the parties, "See you back on Friday, May 16."

A general time waver is then brought up (I believe) by the prosecution. I believe the court explains to the defendant the general time waiver under the penal code and the right to a speedy trial.  A general time waiver means the defendant doesn't have to do the zero of 30.  Judge Ohta asks, "Do you want to keep putting it over?"  Gargiulo agrees to the general time waiver.  However under 1382.a paragraph 2 sub a, if at any time Gargiulo rescinds the general time waiver, he now falls under the requirements of a trial in 60 days.

Judge Ohta asks Gargiulo, "Do you have any questions about what I just read?" "No, your honor," Gargiulo replies. It's on the record. Gargiulo has entered into a general time waiver.

I believe DDA Akemon tells the court that the document, Notice of Results of the LA Sheriff's Dept. hearing, he gave a copy of it to Gargiulo.

And that's it for the May 9th hearing.

It's my understanding that what was found in Gargiulo's mouth during the search on April 18th was the metal clip attached to a ball point pen. My understanding is, the sheriff's report called the piece of metal a "shank" and/or a "handcuff key."