Cameron Brown 3rd Trial, Day 12, Prosecution Testimony Continues

Lauren Sarene Key, 4, died November 8, 2000.
Photo copyright, Sarah Key-Marer; all rights reserved.

UPDATE 4/19 edited for spelling clarity, accuracy

UPDATE editing for spelling, clarity over the lunch hour.
9:55 AM
When I arrive in Dept. 107, there's no one in the gallery. There are different counsel in the well, and it appears that the other pretrial hearing that was supposed to be earlier didn't happen. Someone is 1.5 hours late. I don't know if it's counsel or a defendant. DDA Hum is here, Detective Leslie is here as well as Mr. Laub.

Also in the well, is Brown's defense attorney from the second trial, Pat Harris. I saw Pat Harris last year at the Airport Courthouse at one of the Dawn DaLuise pretrial hearings.  I'm guessing Mr. Harris is not here for this event, but happened to be downtown today and stopped into 107 to check on the case. He was having a jovial conversation with Detective Leslie in the well of the court. It's obvious they are friendly. When Mr. Harris sits in the gallery, I say hello.


Sarah arrived in the gallery a few minutes after I did.  Brown's wife Patty Brown is not here. It's surprising to me that Patty has not been here since the first few days of voir dire. I don't know why she has not attended the third trial.

10:03 AM
One of the jurors is late. DDA Hum informs the court that a clerk or intern will be assisting him with the photos since Detective Leslie is on the stand.

The individual for the other case has not shown up. The court and counsel agree to have that hearing at 11:45 AM.

10:09 AM
The jury files in.

Judge Lomeli informs the jury about the status of the case. The prosecution expects to rest by the end of next week. The site visit is going to be on May 7.  Court will be dark in the afternoon on April 29, and dark on April 30 and May 1. DDA Hum continues his examination of Detective Leslie.

DETECTIVE LESLIE
Leslie and Smith were one of the on call teams on November 8, 2015. There are six teams in Sheriff's Homicide. Each team as a sister team, that alternates from the desk to on call.

Detective Martinez who testified yesterday was a member of the sister team for him and Smith. Leslie and Smith were working another case when the call came in.

Explains why Martinez first went out alone. It was first reported as a recreational accident, not a death. If it's going to take more work than one person can do in an eight hour shift, it's handed off to a two man team. High publicity or celebrity could also trigger a two man team.

Smith and Leslie were assigned to take over the case about 5:20 PM that evening. They had just walked back into the office (in the city of Commerce) at that time.

10:17 AM
Attorney Pat Harris quietly leaves Dept. 107.

Smith and Leslie arrived around 6:30 PM. They arrived in separate cars. They initially arrived in separate cars, at the road that leads down to the archery range from Palos Verdes Drive S.  They then proceeded down to the archery range.

Asks to identify officers who were there when he arrived. Deputy Claus Girmis, (sp?) Dep. Jessisca Brothers. Sgt. [Lt.] Rick Erickson, and the defendant, Mr. Brown. Identifies the witness.

People's 115. Photo of defendant that was taken on that date. Except, the defendant had on a flannel shirt at the archery range.  Brown was by the picnic tables near the archery range. Leslie believes that Dep. Brothers was near Brown.  Lauren was covered by a white sheet. Brown was between 5 to 10 feet (of Lauren?).

He and his partner interviewed Deputies to find out what the situation was. Initially spoke to Deputy Girmis, Then spoke to Deputy Brothers, then spoke to the defendant.  When spoke to Brothers at the scene, did she tell you something? Yes.

At approximately how long did other conversations take place before he talked to the defendant? Not long, a couple of minutes, here and there.  When you contacted defendant at archery range, [why]? There were a couple of reasons. Any time homicide show up in suits and ties, I was trying to introduce myself. Anytime there is family present, to let them know they [Leslie & Smith] are the ones handling the investigation, give them my card. Also wanted to get Brown away from the scene, to speak to him, ... about what had happened.

Initial demeanor of Brown. There was a definite lack of emotion. I would say indifferent. Matter of fact. Would probably be the best words to describe it. When you spoke with the defendant, were his responses appropriate to what you were asking? Oh yes.  He answered the questions Leslie asked.

Did the defendant ever appear to be confused? No, not at all. Did the defendant ever exhibit a blank stare? No. Initially at the scene, about how long did your interaction take? I would say roughly, ten or fifteen minutes, with another five minutes to drive back to the upper road from the archery range once we arranged transportation.

Once you told the defendant you wanted him to go back to the station, did he go with you? Yes. The defendant was concerned about the media. He was also concerned about his car, and the surf board on top and his concern was that it [the surfboard and vehicle] not get stolen. Initially, wanted to tow the vehicle, but Mr. Brown didn't want that so Leslie arranged for it to be driven back to the station.

Originally interviewed him in the same location of where he was near Lauren's body.

Did the defendant ever ask you if he could see Lauren, say goodbye or hold Lauren before going to the station? Not once.

How were you planning to get the defendant back to the station if a deputy drove his car?  Another deputy transported Brown and one drove Brown's car.

From archery range to top of the road, Brown was  in the back seat and they drove up to the top in Erickson's Tahoe. Media was still present.  As they approached the upper road, Brown took the flannel shirt he was wearing and covering his face.

Have you seen a video clip of that incident? Yes. Hum is playing the video. You can see Brown in the back seat, pull a white looking shirt over his head.  Leslie, Lt. Erickson, Brothers and Brown were in the car.

He doesn't remember specifically what Brown said, only that he didn't want to be seen by the media.

During the entire encounter with Brown at the scene until transport to Lomita Station? It was the same. Very matter of fact, indifferent. Casual. He was cooperative, with going back waiting for us to talk to him, but very matter of fact. Indifferent.

Approximately how many times have you encountered a situation where a child died and a parent is present? Too many. Hundreds. [Miss specific question.] Once since [this event].

Have you seen a range of emotions? I have. I've seen every reaction from hysterical, uncontrollable crying, venting, just completely shut off where they can't communicate, tears streaming down their face, anger. I've seen an array of emotions.

Did the defendant's reaction stick in your mind? Yes. Still to this day.

Did you after defendant transported to the station, did you continue your investigation at IP, prior to talking to the defendant?  Five six hours, maybe.

Can you explain why it took that long? The scene was different. It was out doors. It was not a street intersection [where position points and distances could be easily measured]. It took lots of time to determine how to measure, how to put into words how to describe what we were seeing well enough, for someone else to understand what we were seeing. And to do that documentation at night.  All in preparation to speak to Mr. Brown.

Did not go up to the top of IP that night? No. It was dark and dangerous. Opted not to stumble around in the night [with flashlights]. It was too dangerous to go up there at night. Felt that it wasn't going to provide us with anything that night. They decided to hold/secure the scene so it was contained, to prevent anyone from going out there.

They went out there the next day. The scene was still contained.

After conducted their initial investigation at the scene, he went to Lomita Station. Everyone that was there, once left archery range, the handling patrol deputies returned to the station. [Detective Leslie lists the various personnel that returned.] The criminalists and photographers.

Met with the defendant a little after midnight, 12:30 AM.

Just prior to going in and speaking to the defendant, did someone approach you? Specifically Deputy Brothers? Oh yes.

When Deputy Brothers approach you, did she provided you with additional information? Yes. Objection! Sidebar.

What information did Brothers provide you? She had forgotten to tell us that the defendant had a disposable camera with him and had taken photos of Lauren on the hike. She did tell us some things that she felt were odd. Doesn't remember exactly what she said, but things she thought were odd.

She did mention that she thought that it was odd that Brown had commented on the election while they were standing there, waiting for homicide detectives to arrive? [Miss answer.]

Defendant was still wearing the clothes he was wearing at the scene. Chukka style boots, leather boots white socks, light brown cargo type shorts. Faded yellow, off white t-shirt and flannel shirt. Had photographs taken of the defendant.

Four photographs labeled A-D people's exhibit 128. First photo up on the screen, D, the shoes Brown had on his feet.

Photo A is a smaller version of earlier shot, just shown to the jury. Photo B is a full shot of Brown standing, minus the flannel shirt. Photo C is the back of the defendant's t-shirt, depicting some blood soak-age and brain matter human tissue on the top left should portion, and some blood drippage and smears toward the lower area.

Photo D, photo of the leather boots Brown was wearing.

When he talked to the defendant, his clothes were dry but the boots were wet.

Approximately how long did the interview with the defendant take? About 3 hours. It was not recorded.  Originally, his intention at the onset was to video record the interview. Just based on, ... it wasn't what Brown said, it was how he was saying it. [Brown's demeanor.] Original intention was to video tape.

Was it your belief that Lomita had the ability to do that?  Doesen't know if that really was a thought, but knew when he was driving up from the archery range, it was his thought to video tape Brown. In 2000, did not have a cell phone that would do that.

Why wasn't it taped? Once we got into the station, his partner and him split up. When they found out the station did not have the ability to do that, video tape. Smith had a conversation with the defendant's wife and father [in the lobby]. Based on that, they had a concern about time. Smith was told to either charge or release Brown and that an attorney was on his way down to the station. It was Mr. Brown's father who told that to Detective Smith. [It was a decision that was made to get a statement as soon as possible.]

Did he inquire about recording devices the station might have? There were not available at the Lomita Station. He had a device in the trunk of his car. They felt that it was time sensitive, with an attorney on the way, so he did not go get the recorder out of this car. Because of the statements from Brown's family, they wanted to be inquisitive but not throw a tape recorder in front of the parent of a dead child.

[Detective Leslie says something to the effect, now days will have a recorder in his pocket, so that the recorder is not out-front and in front of a parent of a dead child]

Now, currently, he has a small digital recorder, but didn't have access to something like that back then.

Made the decision to get a story from the defendant then, other than not get a story at all. Did not consider the defendant a suspect at the time they started the interview.

Both detectives took notes during the interview. If one was talking, the other was writing. If one jumped in, the other wrote.

Tell us how the interview began. It began with, us asking to go over what had transpired that day, and we started taking. Got background information. Got his birthday, Sept 21, 1961. He was 39.  He was about 6' 2', 6' 3". He was about a good 220 lbs, 230 lbs. His occupation, he said he was an expediter, in essence a baggage handler with American Airlines. His job consisted of transporting baggage from one flight to another. Loading and off loading flights.

He kind of jumped strait into what happened. He said that he was hiking with his daughter. He said that she wanted to go out there to Inspiration Point. Leslie stopped him and had him back up.

He specifically said, throughout the entire interview, from the inception that Lauren wanted to go out there.  He explained that he had gained non-supervised visits. Explained the alternating visits of overnights one week, and day visits, on his days off Tuesdays and Wednesdays. He had visitation for about a year.

He told us that he and Sarah did not get along, and that they rarely or barely spoke. They did not speak to each other.  During the entire interview, did the defendant ask you to notify Lauren's mother about what happened? No.

Miss the next set of questions.

Just prior to going into the interview, Deputy Brothers had mentioned the camera. It was at the end of the interview, at that time they tried to press him, to get some type of emotional response, to take some kind of responsibility. [Brown said] that the photos would show us, that Lauren was having a good time.

Back then in 2000, cameras had strips of negatives? Did you examine the sequence of photographs?Yes.

Describe the camera. It was a Ralph's brand, disposable outdoor camera. It was in the Subaru station wagon. That it had belonged to his father. There were four photos.  The first two photos were blurs. It was too close to the end of the film. The next seven were of the defendant and his father in the Subaru, pictures of surfboards. That nature. There were three photographs of Lauren. One at the parking lot. The next one was taken at the bottom of the trail leading from the parking lot before the preschool. The last one was in a plastic tunnel, taken from the outside. There were 15 unexposed negatives.

That picture at the tunnel, was at the playground. No photographs of Lauren on the trail, no photos of Lauren running ahead. No photos of Inspiration Point. No photos of Lauren on Inspiration POint or the view of Inspiration Point. No photos of Lauren hiking ahead.

Photos A-C people's exhibit 103.

Photo A, on the screen. This is the second photo. At the bottom of the trail from the parking lot. Just east of the playground or preschool.  Middle of the three photos. Photo B is the first photo taken, in the parking lot. I note that the photo is shot from an angle of looking down at Lauren.]

Photo C is Lauren in the tunnel. I can barely see Lauren in the photo. In fact, I can't find her in the photo. The playground tunnel hides where she is.

Detective Leslie testifies he's been to the area, the entire area, on numerous occasions. The defendant never explained how he knew there was an archery range there. There were no signs on the road. The only sign in 2000, was on the archery range itself, on the awning above the picnic area. There was nothing on the beach or the trail or on the upper road, that there is an archery range.  There are signs out there now, not in 2000.

The archery range is not visible from the road or from Portuguese Point.

The interview lasted about 3 hours. Yes. Can you describe for us, throughout the entire interview the defendant's demeanor? Indifferent. It's the same demeanor that was on the 911 call. It was almost scripted. There was no acceptance of responsibility. It was indifferent to the point where his demeanor almost became flippant.

11:36 AM
During your career as an investigator, have you interacted with a number of people who lost family members? Professionally and personally, yes. Hundreds.  Did you ever see a response like the defendant's during that interview. [No.]

Don't different people react differently to grief? There's certainly a range of emotions like I said earlier. When parents lose a child, even a violent death, [an accident, even an expected death (illness)] .. parents always have a tendency to find blame within themselves. I shouldn't have done this, shouldn't have [done that]; I should have seen this coming. They always find a way to blame themselves, no matter how far removed [from the event]. But Brown would accept no blame.

He mentioned this to the defendant, I told him that regardless of what happened, he had to take responsibility. He said he wasn't responsible. Brown said, "She wanted to go out there, I just followed."

Towards the end of the interview, what was odd? I'd realize that we'd been talking about this little girl for three hours. He never called her by her name. [He never said "Lauren."] He never said my little girl. It was always her or she.

When confronted with that the defendant said, "Lauren, I know her name."

Did you ask the defendant about his shirt? In what respect? Did you ask him if you could take the shirt or photograph it? He offered us his shirt, he said that he would just throw it away later.

Did you tell the defendant you thought it was strange that he was showing no emotion? He said that he was emotional earlier, and that he couldn't stop crying on the 911 call.

At one point Detective Leslie accused the defendant of being responsible. He placed the photo of Lauren, of her face, and the severe blunt force trauma in front of him. Brown was told to look at it and pick it up. Leslie testifies, we were trying to illicit some emotion, some responsibility. It was a Polaroid that the coroner took.

People's 130. Photo of Lauren's face. It's completely red, covered in blood. I see on Lauren's little chest, the remains of one of the paramedic sensors. Her shirt was cut away so they could work on her.

Is that the Polaroid you placed in front of the defendant? Yes. Told him to pick it up?  At one point, yes.

He looked at the photograph and said, "Yes, that's her."

Did the defendant show any emotion when you showed him that photograph whatsoever? No.

11:44 AM
The court calls the noon lunch break.  The jury files out.

1:30 PM
I'm inside Dept. 107.  The attorneys are setting up their files.

1:35 PM
Brown is brought out. He leans in to speak to his investigator. He arrived during the morning session.

Continuing with Detective Leslie

JEFFREY LESLIE
When we left off you'd just finished testifying about the coroner's photo. It came from the coroner's investigator Alan Moses. It's often taken for identification. At the scene, Moses asked him if he wanted their own copy.

You used the term almost flippant? Yes. Can you give us an example of what you meant by that? It was at the point of the interview when we became accusatory. It became an interrogation. We accused him of throwing or pushing Lauren, and Brown pointed at their notebook and said, no, I told you what happened. You wrote it down right there.

Finished the interview around 3:30 AM.

When you commented on his lack of emotion, he told you that he was crying earlier and that he couldn't stop crying? [Correct.]

DDA Hum plays the 911 call again. We listen to this again.

Brown looks straight ahead while this tape is played.

Mr. Laub is writing, taking some notes while the tape plays. Brown looks over for a moment while Mr. Laub is writing.

That's the 911 tape where the defendant stated he could not stop crying? Correct.

Earlier in his career, Detective Leslie answered 911 calls and dispatched police. What struck you about that call was missing?  Hurry up. He worked the desk during the LA riots. He's never taken a righteous emergency call, and not say hurry up. Quit asking me questions and just hurry up. I never heard, hurry up, please hurry, I need you to get here.

Detective Leslie, after the defendant left Lomita Station, at 3:30 in the morning, did you ever speak to him again until he was arrested until 3 years later? No.  Did you make attempts to speak to him? Yes. There were things that we wanted to clarify.

Laub asks to approach.

Why did you want to talk to the defendant again. We had additional questions once we learned a bit more about Lauren, what she liked, what she liked to do.

Laub objects again.

Were there other reasons why you wanted to talk to him? We wanted to go to up to Inspiration Point with him. To find out where he was seated, where she was seated, where she was throwing rocks.

You made numerous attempts to speak to the defendant? Yes. The next time was about six days later.
My partner and I knocked on the door. Ultimately his wife Patricia opened the door. [She handed s two business cards], one for herself and one for the defendant, they were attorneys. She said if the relationship was to be long term, they would have to go through the attorneys.

Go back to the afternoon and evening of 2008, when you met the defendant at the archery range, and some of the things you did prior going to the station. He had never met Brown before. He never had anything against him. No. Was it your intention, to make this incident, into a murder? No. Was it your intention to make this a murder rather than an accident, as opposed to anything else? No. Were you out to get him? No.

Went out to Inspiration Point, and walked all the way out to the inlet [beach level]. Detective Leslie found items that he thought had evidentiary value. Each item of evidence was marked with a placard, but he felt they would not give us a perspective, and so they got spray paint. Then spray painted those numbers on the rocks.(Missed #1)  Retrieved mens underwear, briefs. Marked those as number 2. Cigarette buts, marked as three and four. And there was a small amount of blood, that was marked as evidence #5.

Discussing the items they collected.

Items they knew were related to this case, were the boxers and the blood. The other items they did not know if they were relevant or not. The underwear did not look like they had been there a long, long time. These were the white briefs.

People's 119, already marked. Five photos, A-E.

Photo A. Represent the area as it looked in 2000. Photo A is an aerial photo, of the south east portion of the point, with the u shape that juts out over the paint. At the bottom right hand portion, you can see the orange numeral.  Photo B was taken on the tide pool up. Points out where the items of evidence were marked.  Pointing to various points at the base of the cliff.

1 blue boxer shorts.
2 white briefs
3 cigarette butt
4 cigarette butt
5 blood

Photo C, This is a flat rock, adjacent to the water, this is the volume of blood and human tissue.

Photo D This is a close up of the boxer shorts.

Photo E Close up photograph of the blood and brain matter.

2:02 PM
The inlet itself, did you view it before you went to Lomita Station? The inlet was probably twenty feet across. Begins at the edge of the shale. Water flows in from the ocean, and into a cove at the base or bottom of Inspiration Point.  The water goes underneath the cliff? Yes.

The rocks on either side of the inlet? It's shale, it's a tide pool area. It's rather rough, jagged rock, barnacles. And that would be true on the sides of the inlet as well? Yes.

First I'll have you describe various areas that we've been discussing, starting with the parking lot all the way to the archery range.

This is the introduction of photos.

First, this area, Portuguese Point, Inspiration Point and the parking lot and archery range. The points face south. The road is in the 5200 block. There are rises and dips in Palos Verdes Drive South. Two lane highway, one lane in each direction. Between Inspiration Point and Portuguese Point, off Palos Verdes Drove S, there is a dirt shoulder where people can walk.

People's exhibit 120. Overview photo of the general area. [I've posted a photo similar, but just of Inspiration Point.]

To the left of the photo off to the left, would be west, towards LAX. The right side would be east towards Long Beach or San Pedro.  Identifies on the map Palos Verdes Drive South, which is an east to west highway.

On the photograph itself, can you point out for us, the Abalone cover parking lot, is in the top left hand portion of the exhibit. That's where the defendant said he parked his father's car? Yes.  That's above the beach level? Yes.

The trail head from the parking lot leaves the lot from the east side. The trail winds down this way and then down to the beach, right about here.  Describe that trail for us. It can be rather steep. It's about a foot and a half, two feet wide, dirt trial.

Is it steep the whole way? It flattens out in parts. Points out the fire road that goes down to the beach level to the preschool in the photo. Portuguese Bend preschool. It's easily to see the road. There is a locked gate at the top at PV Drive S.

He went down to the preschool as part of his investigation. Yes. November 10th or 11th. At that time, there was play equipment inside the preschool. The playground equipment is no longer there, but the preschool is still there.

If one to leave the preschool, and head east, are there various ways that one can go? You can walk along the beach, or there are trails that you can take, but they all continue east.  What's the nest most prominent feature? The next is a little wash, or gully.

If you take the trail? [?] Depending on the tides, can you walk along the beach towards Portuguese Point? Yes.  Pounts out how far you can walk. The surface is various composition. There's sand, loose gravel and large rocks as you proceed east.

There are other ways to get to Portuguese Point. There are hiking trials, and would again intersect with another fire road, on the west side of Portuguese Point.

You mentioned a gully, how do you get through that area?  On the west side of the gully, the trails are passable. There have been steps made into the gully. Back then, it was much steeper. Explains the trails and routes that can be taken.

If you were traveling east, and went down into the gully, you said you could go up the east side, up onto some bluffs, can go down and [around?] and will end up on top of that bluff. You are about 40 to 60 feet, above the beach.

From the bluff, you can reach a fire road, that goes up to Portuguese Point. There are other trails, depending on the time of year, that will intersect the road that goes up to Portuguese Point.

Describe this road. I call it a fire road. I believe it's used by the life guards as well. There's a life guard station down here. There are some tide pools. It's wide enough for a car. It kind of makes an S curve, as you come up towards Palos Verdes Drive and towards Portuguese Point.

Where that fire road intersects Portuguese Point, is there a locked gate? Yes. This fire road is quite steep, once you make that S curve, and make assent up to PP.  Are there trails that go along the bluff, those trails intersect that road.

There is a track, around the top of PP. It's wide, it's fenced. It has a three rail fence that goes around the edge. It resembles a football field, about 50 yards wide and 100 yards long. the road is inside the fence line.  There are warning signs not to go past the fence line.

Any different in the view from Inspiration Point to Portuguese Point? No. If one was traveling, continuing away from Pourtuguese Point, what is the next major landmark?  It would be Inspiration Point, or Sacred Cove, also called the nude beach, between the points.

There are various ways you can go between Portuguese Point and Inspiration Point. Can take the fire road, up toward Palos Verdes Drive S. Explains the other routes.

Brown looks up at the overhead while Leslie testifies.

There are more than one way to get out on Inspiration Point. You can take the trail down toward Sacred Cove. That trail branches off, and go toward the west side of IP, or you can travel the Palos Verdes Drive S, just above the archery range, and it will take you up to Inspiration Point.

The trail that goes down to the nude beach, you said that trail branches off and can go up to Inspiration Point? Yes. Describe that trail, The trail is like a game trail. It's narrow, it's very steep. It's a steep climb.

In 2000, he viewed that trail. Yes. Now there is fencing along that trail. Back in 2000, there was not.

That trail, that begins above the archery range also goes out to Inspiration Point.  Points out how that trail goes. It's 1,200 feet, or roughly a quarter of a mile, this trail.

Regardless of which way you go, if you take the trail up the side, or the trail from Palos Verdes Dr. South, is there some place at the neck where these trails join? [Yes.]

Judge Lomeli calls for the afternoon break. The court notices that there are a few jurors, that appear to be struggling. He lets them take a break, get some juice and come back in 15 minutes. Brown, Laub and his investigator stand and face the jurors as they walk out.

There is someone in the custody area, so Brown can not be taken back immediately.

2:35 PM
Mr. Laub, DDA Hum and Detective Leslie have a friendly banter in the well of the court.

2:42 PM
The courtroom is very quiet now. Laub and his investigator chat at the defense table.

2:47 PM
DDA Hum paces a bit in the well and goes over his note pad. The defense investigator takes a phone call and leaves the courtroom.  Judge Lomeli takes the bench. The defendant is brought back out. The investigator returns.

The bailiff calls for the jury. The jury files in.

DETECTIVE LESLIE
When we left off, discussing where the two trails meet. The narrowest portion of IP where the two trails meet. You come along the east side, left side of IP, as you head south. You're within inches of the edge. It's literally a straight drop down. Then there's a bit of a brush area, almost like a canopy, and it opens up to the right. Later, you realize that trail takes up again, along the ? side of the point.

Was there any gate or signage on IP in 2000? No. There is now.

If you are on the end of IP, facing the ocean, to your right is LAX, the playground, the wash, PP, the nude beach. To the left would be the archery range.

If one were to travel from Abalone cove Parking lot, and traveled onto the trail that leads out onto IP, that road length is nine tenths of a mile. Measured the trail from the parking lot, down to the nursery school, up to PP and onto IP, that hike is little over a mile and a half.

What is the most recent time you went out to these areas. He was there last week. He believes it was Friday.  Describe any significant changes. In the area of IP itself, the east side of IP is much much steeper than it was in 2000. It's much steeper. Another thing he noticed was, at the archery range it used to be a casual decline down to the beach. That's not been built up with filler and it's now quite steep.

The vegetation on IP. Is there a difference as to how it was in Nov 2000? It's pretty much the same. It changes throughout the year but we haven't had much rain.

The bush that was described is no longer there.

Changes in the archery range, it's much nicer. It appears to have been upgraded and some work done to it. The awing the covering the picnic tables is no longer there now. There are picnic tables remaining and two large storage containers.

In 2000, there was a trail that came down that you could take onto the beach and go to the archery range. The fire road that goes down to the archery range, is blocked by a gate and it was so in 2000.

He walked the same walk out to the inlet, on the side of IP where the archery range. Beyond that first inlet, there is a second inlet. If swam across that, you would then reach the rocky outcropping, and be on the west side of IP.

If you were on the nude beach, and wanted to get to the inlet closest to the archery range and not swim across the inlet, the only way would be to go back to the cliffs and climb up over.

Now going to go through a series of photographs.

Exhibit 121. Aerial photo Palos Verdes Drive South, looking eastward from the air.
Exhibit 122. Aerial photo of Palos Verdes Drive South, shows the coastline, the nursery school, the parking lot, etc.

Asks the witness to identify key points in the photos and mark them on the photos.

People's exhibit 106, will put this on the overhead screen. A side view of the cliff and winding fire road up the cliff from the nursery school.

3:04 PM
People's exhibit 112, aerial photo if Inspiration Point. Asked to point out the archery range.

Another exhibit, aerial photo of Inspiration Point. Marks which trail that comes down from Palos Verdes Drive South, down to the beach and also goes up the side of IP.

Peoples 123, five photos A-E.
Photo A, entrance to Abalone cove parking. Photo B part of the parking lot near where the trail head ends. Photo C, the lower portion of the trail, down to the fire road that leads to the preschool.  Photo D, the playground equipment. Photo E, is at the nursery school, looking towards PP.

Peoples 10, Three photographs, A, B, C. This is the area between the wash, the gully he spoke of before, the west side, and PP on the right hand side of the photo.  Photo A, Leslie is in the middle of the circle. He was directed there by (Mr. Sam Horn?). This is the trail that's closest to the bluff. On this trail, he's closer to Palos Verdes Drive S. On that trail, he intersects with a fire road.

Next photo his himself going out to PP. The direction these photos are looking are in the direction of the Abalone cove parking lot.

People's 110. Next three photos, A-C. Photo A, PP. The trail in the foreground, is along the bluff, it's the southern most trail. In Photo B, looking out a knoll above IP.  Photo C, a little different view of the knoll and the ridge that leads out onto IP.

People's 129 A & B. Photo A, is the portion of the trail leading down to the nude beach. Photo B is the same trail, the lower portion leading onto the nude beach.  And can see part of the trail that branches off and leads to ... [miss rest].

People's 124 A-C. Photo A, This is on top of PP. These were taken at the north east portion of the point showing the three rail fence. The fencing at the northeast portion of PP, is that any different now. There's now actually a gate in the fence where in 2000, there wasn't.

You talked with us at some length about the difference between PP and IP? Yes.

People's 125, Photos A & B. Photo A is IP. Photo B is PP. This shows the contrasting ends of each points. Overhead aerial photos. The photos are taken with the view pointing south, as if you are up above, and far back into the cliff looking down and out towards the ocean.

You testified about the statement the defendant gave and left about 3:30 in the morning of November 9th.  Yes. He went back out onto IP in the afternoon of Nov 9th. He drove. They came from the autopsy and went back out with his partner.

He met members of the investigation team.

Michelle Vivisto [?], and a photographer Darnel Carter [?]

This was to document the top of IP, because it wasn't safe to do at night before.

It was still secured when they got out there on the afternoon of 11/9. They went out to the end of IP.

When you went out there on Nov 9, of 2000, did you notice any vegetation on the U shape, that was significant. And that was the bush described by Detective Brothers. It was adjacent to that, it was on the left looking out towards the ocean. Closest to the archery range.

In that U shaped area that sloped downward. Can you tell us what the ground was like? It's dirt, but it's kind of a crusty dirt. It's loose soil. There were some dead grass and twigs. It almost had a crust on top but underneath, it had soft dirt.

The area that you said had crusty dirt, it was adjacent to the bush. That U shape area that you described, where is that in relation to the inlet closest to the archery range? It's directly above it.

Did you see anything in the U shape area that you thought was significant?  There was some impressions there. He attended classes in learning to recognize tracks.

Did you went up there to stand up and look over them? No. Too close to the edge.

You really couldn't tell. You could tell it was disturbed, but you couldn't tell what they were. He wasn't going to go down on that slope. His photographer refused to go close. Continued to have IP held by uniformed deputies, and made arrangements, had deputy Dale Falicon, document the top of the cliff, the southern portion of IP, and the particular disturbances that he saw.

Other than those impressions in that U shape area, did you see anything from your viewing on November 9th that was evidentiary value?  In the latter, the absence of anything significant. I didn't see drag marks or slide marks, or anything where the vegetation had been marked down, other than the disturbances in that sloped portion.

On Nov 10, was with partner Smith and Dale Falcion, and a few others. When they returned on November 10 of 2000, the area was still secure. On Nov 10, Deputy Ashrain, harnessed Deputy Falicon with a rope, and took one to one black and white photographs and they [impressions] were also casted on top of the cliff, in order to see if there was any comparison to ridge detail.

When went back on Nov 10th, saw the same impressions as he saw on Nov 9th.

Prior to having Deputy Falicon photograph these impressions, did you tell Deputy Falicon anything about what happened or what to look for? Had given him a brief overview of what had happened and asked him to document what he had found on the cliff in that area, and to do whatever possible to document what we hand seen.

Did you tell him the defendant had claimed Lauren had slipped over the edge? Doesn't remember if he told him that or not. Told him to look for anything significant, evidence of drag or slip marks, or evidence of trampling. If he could tell if they were shoe prints or if we could determine what they were.  Observed Deputy Falicon do his work.  Then asked Deputy Asheron to rappel over the cliff, in an attempt to locate any blood, biological material, hairs, fibers, any impact or points of impact on the cliff, that he could see.

Explains what rappel means. Observed Asaran rappel down the face of the cliff. Asked if he found anything. Ashran did not find anything.  He was at the bottom, assisting with the rappel. He was pointing out loose rocks to Deputy Asaran, because there were rocks that would fall from the top.

People's exhibit 158, photos A-D. Photos of the rock area is the southeast portion of IP, looking straight at the point. A side view photo, D looking at the east from the west. (Photo D is similar to a photo I took of the same area.)

3:35 PM
He went to the west side of IP, the sunbathing beach. From the west side of IP, can you see down to the nude beach? Yes. Can you see PP? Yes.

He also went to the east side of IP, to that U shape area. Can you see the nude beach? No. Can you see PP? No. Can you see the trails between the two points, from that U shape area? No, you cannot.

A couple of years later, November 15, of 2000, did you have video taken .. Laub corrects DDA Hum. Video was taken in 2002.  Video of the area taken. Asks that as the video is playing, to tell us about the areas we're looking at.

This is IP, viewed from the helicopter. This is the parking lot. and the beach below. The entrance to the parking lot and toll booth. As the video plays, points out things. Points out the bluff above the beach. Coming to the trail head, coming down to the nursery school, Points out the trail from the parking lot. Points out the fire trail. This is the gully and the wash, this is the trail that goes along the beach, along the bluff here. Shows the bluff or knoll above PP.  More areas of the entire area that are pointed out.

3:45 PM
Pointing out the various topical areas of IP, the U shape, the western point edge, the eastern U portion, the tide pools below. The helicopter then lands on the point.

Brown, Laub and the investigator watch the video along with the jury. Now video of the helicopter taking off, and the video ends.

No more questions at this point in time.

Judge Lomeli orders the jurors back at 9:30 tomorrow. We are in recess. The judge is off the bench.

Brown is taken back into custody. And that's it for today.

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.

Phil Spector Pretrial Hearing August 14th, 2008, Kazuhoshi Miura, Cameron Brown and Dominick Dunne

With so much going on in the Sprocket household these days, I decided to drive into downtown LA for Spector's pretrial hearing so I could get back home, faster. I was hoping that I might run into Dr. C. Carroll Adams for an update on what's happening in the Cameron Brown case and as luck would have it, Dr. Adams was in the hallway on the 9th floor, waiting for Judge Pastor's courtroom to open at 1:30. He is currently watching a retrial of a case he first started watching at the end of Spector 1. He could not talk about it above a whisper at all (I barely heard what he said), since jurors from that trial were in the hallway all around us.

Dr. Adams mentioned that Spector's defense team was at the courthouse yesterday, appearing before Judge Perry in Dept 104. This had to do with the double jeopardy issue and the motion for an "indefinite stay" in Spector's trial that the Associated Press reported on yesterday.

We talked a bit about this motion for an indefinite stay filed by Spector's defense team. I will explain it a bit here since I've received a few emails and comments on the blog about the "double jeopardy" motion filed by the defense and people are confused about it. First, you need to read the defense's motion , titled "DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF MOTION IN LIMINE, BASED ON PLEA OF ONCE IN JEOPARDY, FOR ORDER PRECLUDING THE PROSECUTION FROM DISCUSSING IN ITS OPENING STATEMENT, INTRODUCING EVIDENCE OF, MAKING CLOSING ARGUMENTS ON, OR SEEKING INSTRUCTIONS ON ANY LESSER INCLUDED OFFENSE OF THE CHARGED CRIMES OF SECOND DEGREE MURDER." It's available on the LA County Court's website, here. After that, I recommend reading the prosecution's response to that motion here, on T&T. I did not copy the entire document and the Court's website has not yet uploaded a copy of the document.

At the end of Spector 1, once both parties rested and the jury instructions were hammered out. (Do you remember that torturous process?) At that time, the Court ruled that since no party presented a theory that would support a lesser included charge (manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter), then the jury would not receive any instruction to consider lesser included. They were only given the option of second degree murder or not guilty. The defense is now trying to say that since the Court instructed that in the first trial, that amounts to an "acquittal" of a lesser charge of manslaughter or involuntary manslaughter. Consequently, because of that ruling, the prosecution should be prohibited from being able to present any arguments for lesser included charges in their case in the retrial, because if they did, that would be "double jeopardy" for those lesser charges.

On July 29th, the motions mentioned above were argued before Judge Fidler. At that hearing, Fidler stated that he would not rule on the defense motion at this time because it's too early. The Court does not know what the evidence will show. He would not make a ruling. There is no decision on this yet because the trial evidence has not been presented to a jury. However, the defense went before another judge requesting an "indefinite stay" so they will have ample time to "appeal" this issue. The problem is, there is no ruling to appeal. Fidler hasn't ruled on their initial motion. My thoughts are (and one reporter I spoke to agreed with me) that this stay will fail because how can one appeal a nonexistent ruling? Here is what I think is happening: Spector is trying to delay the trial by any means possible and Riordan and Weinberg are just following Spector's marching orders. If Riordan is half the appellate attorney he thinks he is, he knows this latest stunt will not fly.

The Cameron Brown case, Dr. Adams tells me that the trial has been delayed until sometime in early October. He did not have an exact date for me in his notes. Geragos is off the case and Pat Harris has officially taken over as lead counsel. According to Dr. Adams, apparently, Geragos has not been paid and that appears to be the main reason he's no longer representing Brown. The next pretrial hearing in that case is scheduled for September 5th, and the count reset to 0-45 from that date. From what Dr. Adams told me, Harris is currently in trial on another case and that is delaying the Brown case. At the last hearing it was agreed by both parties and the Court that Harris doesn't have to appear on September 5th; someone can stand up for him. I won't be attending that hearing but thought I would report on the new dates for those who are interested.

While I'm talking to Dr. Adams, Allan Parachini arrived and so did the AP reporter and another reporter whom I don't know. They are chatting away about the Miura hearing tomorrow in Torrance. Almost at the same time, Ciaran shows up as well as Robin and Sherri. It's about 1:25 pm and Courtroom 106 isn't open yet. There is a cameraman talking to Allan, and for a moment I think he's going to cover the proceeding but then he says his goodbye's to Allan and the other reporter's and takes off. There will be no video coverage or photos of today's rulings. Two distinguished gentlemen arrive and stand near the end of the hall. I get the feeling they are from the DA's office because they are not carrying briefcases but I don't know for sure.

Weinberg arrives without Riordan. Spector has waived his right to appear which means Rachelle Short, the trial bride has missed another photo op. Weinberg comes up and shakes hands with the AP reporter and says hello to the group of reporters. A few minutes later the prosecution team arrives. It's Alan Jackson, Truc Do, Ric Ocampo and a few others I don't recognize. The team greets the reporters and walk past them to shake hands with the gentlemen who arrived earlier and are standing a bit behind the press. I didn't see Sandi Gibbons walk up but she's here. The courtroom is finally opened and everyone slowly files in. Once inside the courtroom a familiar face who was at the prosecution table operating the Elmo shows up and says hello to everyone. She takes a seat on the "defense" side of the room. If I'm recalling correctly, I believe her name is Sudi.

The man I don't recognize with the prosecution team sits directly in front of me beside Ric Ocampo. I'm in the second row, about two seats in, leaving plenty of room for the AP reporter who likes to sit on the end of that row. The reporter is right there ready to sit down and I think I mention to Sherri or Robin that this is where the AP reporter likes to sit. she smiles and I tell her, "That is your reserved seat." Sherri and Robin sit in the row behind me. The AP reporter is kind enough to update me on Dominick Dunne. I knew that the surgery was cancelled but I didn't know that the book he is currently working on is his memoirs. I thought he was still working on finishing his last Bailey book. The AP reporter said that he went to the Dominican Republic for stem cell treatments. While he was there, a big party was thrown for him. He may go back and get another round of treatments there. That's just like Dominick to have a great time in the midst of his health issues. I said to the reporter, "Dominick has so much to offer the world. It would be so sad if he's not with us much longer." Please go to Dominick's Diary page, and leave him some positive thoughts towards a swift recovery. You could also send him a card, care of Vanity Fair and it will get to him.

Jackson and Truc Do are at the prosecution table, and Jackson is speaking to the reporter I don't know, who is sitting beside Ciaran. Jackson and the reporter exchange a few words about the Miura hearing in Torrance tomorrow, where Jackson will be presenting arguments to continue the extradition of Miura to the US. Jackson then looks over at me and asks how I'm doing. I don't hear his question clearly, and I think he's asking about Mr. Sprocket (but I realize how could he know about his injured arm) and then I think I hear the words carpal tunnel. I don't know why but I'm embarrassed. He's asking about my writing at the keyboard. I'm a little befuddled because I'm now wondering if he is referring to all my typing of recreating the prosecution's motions for the blog, but I'm also wondering if he was referring to the fact that I don't have my laptop with me. I smile and say I'm fine.

As I look around the courtroom, I see Pat Dixon in the third row, way off to my left. He's busy studying a small section of newspaper. Jackson, Truc and Weinberg all go into Judge Fidler's chambers and are there for a few minutes and after they exit, court is called into session.

Fidler states that since the people have presented two motions they should go first. Jackson starts off by mentioning something about a filing that the defense made that ". . . purports to be a declaration, but it's not a declaration. It doesn't establish any evidence or facts...but it does state argument...." Since I don't know what document he is referring to, I'm immediately lost. I then regain my footing just a tad. It has something to do with the defense making a statement, something to the effect of, the Court has ruled the PBA witnesses could not testify. That didn't make any sense because they were admitted, but maybe the defense motion is about the one's who were excluded. I'm lost again.

Jackson then moves on to present the argument of his motion to admit all 12 PBA's, and his argument is the Doctrine of Chances and the Doctrine of Corroboration.

AJ: "1101(b) doesn't require that level of recipe, that all 1101(b)'s are on a date . . . the defense said this is not consistent because it's not similar enough . . . they are relying on a civil case, Bowen, and not a criminal law case." Jackson explains the case, and says that the Court ruled correctly in that case to exclude all eight PBA's. "(In this case here) . . . in every one of our incidents, the exact same weapon was used . . . that distinguishes our case from Bowen . . . a single common marker . . . and in our case. . ."

Weinberg then stands up to interrupt Jackson. He's objecting to Jackson's motion. He's upset that Jackson is arguing a motion that they did not have time to respond to. That in the last hearing, time lines were agreed upon as to when motions would be filed. The prosecution was supposed to file by August 8th, and they filed this motion they are arguing on August 11th. And, the prosecution has not responded to their motions about the PBA's or Kemper. It's Weinber's understanding that this was all agreed to in the last hearing. You can tell he's quite perturbed that the prosecution has not followed the agreed upon filing dates, and has not made any formal response to their motions.

Weinberg is upset about the prosecution's latest motion to admit the PBA's under a new theory, the Doctrine of Chances and the Doctrine of Corroboration. . . these are totally contrary to what where the Court ruled in the first trial, that the PBA's needed to be linked by motive. "What the Court said is motive. The Curt identified that as the basis . . . no way that this evidence flies as motive . . . they are trying to do exactly what you told them not to do.

Jackson steps away from the podium and sits down. Weinberg continues: "There's no response (from the prosecution) to the "motive" motion (they filed) . . . Riordan is not here today to brief it, and there are no motions in reply."

Judge Fidler then says, "This is a new trial. I'm not bound by any of that. I'm not bound by anything in the first trial." He goes onto explain that we are starting fresh here. If a new argument is presented, a new theory for admitting evidence, he's obligated to consider it.

Out of the corner of my eye I see Dixon motioning Ocampo in the first row to come over to where he is sitting.

Jackson gets up and explains to the Court that, "We didn't respond because our thought is, we didn't think it was necessary. We thought it was ridiculous. We felt we didn't need to (respond)."

Jackson goes onto explain that these arguments are all interconnected. We don't concede motive. We don't concede Kemper. We are seeking 12 witnesses.

Unfortunately it's not clear in my notes but I believe this next part is Weinberg speaking.

"They presented the Doctrine of Chances; the Doctrine of Corroboration . . . under that theory . . . our motion was to exclude this evidence on motive . . . our motive is that there simply is a misconstruction of motive of 1101(b). . . with Kemper . . . that was presented as a common scheme or plan, not motive."

Jackson leans over and whispers to Truc as Weinberg is speaking.

Weinberg goes onto say, "There are so many things wrong here. . . In order to add Kemper, they are suddenly changing their scheme . . ."

Jackson stands up and says, "Mr. Weinberg says he's not prepared . . . not prepared to argue Kemper. . . and then he argues Kemper . . . we could have saved several pages of Diane's transcription (the court reporter) . . . and the court's time . . ."

Judge Fidler finally says something to the effect of, that all these arguments should be addressed at one time and not in piecemeal. All parties agree to that and a new trial date is set for September 15th at 1:30 pm. The admissibility of Dr. Pena as a witness is brought up and whether or not that will be argued then but I believe the Court indicated that this would be held over until October 2-3, or right before trial starts.

And that's it. Court is over. The reporters are commenting a bit that there is no headline today. The AP reporter says that in a few days (I think next week) she's going to Vegas to cover the OJ trial, so she may or may not be here for the start of Spector. As we all slowly head toward the elevators, Weinberg answers a few questions off the record. As we wait for the elevator, I ask Mr. Weinberg if he is flying home this evening. Sherri, Robin and I ride the elevator down with him. He is polite to Sherri and Robin, asking who they are, what is their interest in the trial and making a correct guess that they are not here, "for" Spector. I had the devilish urge to introduce myself as, "the woman your client tried to get permanently removed from the courtroom in the first trial," but I censored myself and didn't say anything.

On the way back to the parking lot I gave donchais a call and tried to explain what happened today; basically nothing. I think both sides came to the hearing unprepared, but for different reasons. I have to say, it didn't appear to be a very good excuse that Jackson gave for not having filed any responses to Weinberg's motions. From what transpired, it looks like the prosecution is presenting an entirely different theory for Spector 2, as to why all the 12 1101(b) witnesses should be admitted into evidence. Whether Fidler will be swayed by their new arguments remains to be seen on September 15th.

Cameron Brown Pretrial Hearing, May 13th 2008

This is an unedited, unfinished DRAFT entry.

A while back, a few of my trial watcher friends have been wondering what ever happened to the Cameron Brown case. For those of you who have never heard of this case, back on November 8th of 2000, Cameron Brown allegedly threw his four-year-old daughter, Lauren Serene Key-Marer off a steep cliff, Inspiration Point in Palos Verdes, California, to avoid paying child support to her mother, Sarah Key-Marer. His first trial hung, not because some jurors thought he was innocent; they hung on the degree of guilt.

I was searching around for some information on the case and came across a news report that Brown would be in two different courtrooms on May 13th in downtown Los Angeles and I thought that was interesting. Supposedly, Brown "turned in" a home made knife of some sort that he claims was planted in his cell and he was being charged on that. In addition, Brown somehow got his trial moved from Torrance to downtown Los Angeles in Judge Michael Pastor's court 107, right across the hall from Judge Fidler's courtroom. It's been some time since we've had a good trial to follow so I thought that I would drop in on the two hearings for Cameron Brown to see if I might want to follow this trial. It might start around the same time that Pellicano & Christensen, round two start and it will be a decision which trial I decide to watch. At Pellicano, which is in Federal Court, I know Ciaran and Steven will be covering it and I'll have great company and get some inside scoops. I have no idea who much interest Brown will get in downtown. The LA County Public Liaison's office tells me they have had zero interest in Brown.

On Tuesday, Mr. Sprocket drops me off at the North Hollywood station but I miss the 7:20 train by about 10 seconds. I'm on the escalator from the ticket platform to the trains and the bell goes off that the doors to the train are closing. That means I won't be in the Courthouse until 8 am, and I know Pastor's courtroom starts right on time. I had already contacted my friend, Dr. Carroll Adams, who got interested in a trial in Pastor's court when Spector was just about ending and things got weird in that courtroom. He's been following several trials in Pastor's courtroom ever since so I knew he would have the scoop on which hearing would be first.

When the 7:30 am train comes at 7:25 am, they don't let everyone on right away. Metro does a security sweep of the train and it all the times I took the subway to watch Spector, this is the first time I've actually seen them perform a security check of the cars.

I don't have a book today and I'm tempted to ask someone for a section of paper. A man is on his laptop, several people are reading the paper and I see a woman putting on her makeup. The car is pretty full with at least 15 people standing. An older gentleman with a lined face offers a woman his seat and then the young man next to me gets up and offers his seat to the older gent who just got up for a woman.

In the Hollywood Hills/Cahuenga Pass, where the train reaches speeds up to 70 mph, there is some unique advertising in the tunnels now, that I first saw on my way home on Friday for the Miura hearing. As the train speeds by for quite a distance you see an ad. On Friday, it was promotion for the movie Speed Racer. I've also noticed that the train platform notification boards that were the same type you see on freeways with the moving text, have been replaced with LCD screens and more information. And, the time is visible at the very top of the screens.

I clear security on the main floor and on the 9th. As I round the corner from the elevator bays I see Carroll with his great smile and it's a good feeling to see a familiar face. We catch up on the latest news. There are two nondescript people waiting for Pastor's courtroom to open also, but I can't imagine from the way they are dressed that they are here for Brown's hearing. They leave the hallway but show back up later. When we finally get inside 107, the benches have double cushions! For the seat and the back. Carroll says, "Now you can see why I started hanging out in Pastor's courtroom," and we both have a chuckle because the benches in Fidler's court with no cushions are quite hard.

Carroll knows everyone in Pastor's courtroom and he points out Judge Pastor's clerk, Sammie Benson and his new bailiff, Kirk Richardson as well as the names of Pastor's court reporters: Mavis Theodoro and Pat McNeal, who unusually, still uses the "old style" of stenography machine. Carroll tells me the story of what happened to the prior bailiff and it's quite sad. He's got quite a recovery ahead for his injuries. We see Judge Pastor, a distinguished looking man with grayish hair, come out and talk to two attorneys but he's not in his robes. I jot down the phone number to Pastor's courtroom just in case I want to check on hearing dates and times. I ask Carroll how old is Judge Pastor because to me, he looks quite young. "He's 65 and has been on the bench for 26 years," Carroll replies.

Pastor now comes back out into the courtroom with his robes on, but he doesn't take the bench directly. Carroll introduces me to a defense attorney from another trial he watched, Tom Burns, where the verdict was overturned and the case must be retried. If I'm remembering correctly, supposedly the defendant (or maybe it was a critical witnesses) was not told that he could have his own interpreter. I have in my notes the defendant was Pedro Avena, but I might be wrong about that.

Finally, Cameron Brown is brought into the courtroom wearing an orange suit. He doesn't look anything like the photos I've seen on some support blogs. He's rail thin and his beard is quite long, at least eight to ten inches long. His hair is not grown out, it's trimmed short along the back of his neck, and I see that the beard appears to be evenly trimmed around his cheekbones. Cameron turns and nods to the two people in the courtroom who were in the hall earlier. I'm shocked. At first I thought the woman might be a relative, like his mother but it dawns on me this must be "Patty," his wife. The man who was with her I didn't pay much attention to, but later I come to realize that this must be Patty's brother, Theodore (aka "Ted") who is very vocal on Usenet and several blogs in support of his brother-in-law. Maybe it's just me, maybe I've totally abandoned my 70's hippie teens, but if my husband was on trial for murder, I wouldn't be showing up to court so casually dressed wearing flip flops (and we are NOT talking high end, gemstone adorned footwear like what you would find on Rachelle Short's feet but standard black flip flops) or forgotten to put a brush through my hair.

Court is called into session. Craig Hum for the people; Pat Harris on behalf of the defense. Harris brings up an issue that was raised last time about delays in meeting with his client at the jail. The Court has a trial (or is it two) that will be heard before this one and it's not clear how long that trial will take at this time. A new pretrial date is set for June 13th, and the count is reset to 0-45 from that date. Defendant waives rights, and accepts the new date. The Court states that it will have a much better idea on that date as to the schedule and a firm trial date.

Harris brings up the issue that the defendant is trying to get his hair cut and a medical appointment before trial. And that's it. It's mentioned that the next hearing is in Department 133 on the 13th floor. And that's it. I say my goodbye's to Carroll, and head off to the 13th floor.

Patty and Ted and I are all in the same elevator. Patty has what appears to be a letter in her hand and she starts to read the letter to him, "...all he's concerned about..." and then Ted goes, "Sussh!" at Patty and that's all of their conversation I overhear. On the 13th floor we see a sign that states Department 133 is on the fifteenth floor, and we all head back to the elevators to go up two floors. Department 133 is Judge Sterling's courtroom and there are several people in the gallery and another case is being adjudicated. Patty and Ted sit in different rows, far from each other. Since there is another case being heard, I sit in the nearest row available, but it means I can't hear what's going on as well. People are coming and going and the courtroom is quite noisy.