Guess Who’s Back??

The Defense Calls… The Victim (again). I guess he had a change of heart and felt like talking. He is still wearing all orange (since he’s still in jail), and we find out he’s not very well spoken, but here’s what we got:

  • The defense attorney opens by trying a number of different lines of questioning attempting to get at why he was originally unwilling to testify. The prosecutor objected to every question, and all the objections were upheld.
  • Victim claims he has been shot at around 20 times in his life, but never hit.
  • When asked if he has enemies, he said yes, but he didn’t think anyone was trying to get him.
  • His description of the shooting – he guesses “he heard a shot and glass and everything.” He then hit the ground and crawled behind a car. Said he was only worried about himself and his safety. Said the shooter’s car never really slowed down, and he didn’t see the license plate at the scene. He just had the license information for the car that the defendant had been driving.
  • When asked about the women in his life – he said he has 6 baby mamas, though at the time of the shooting he only had 5. He also had 5 other women pregnant at the time of the shooting. And there were also about 10 other women that he was intimate with around that time. (one juror said they saw the defendant laughing when he was making these claims)
  • The Victim claimed that it was his ex wife who was in the double-parked SUV on the scene. She was in that car when the shooting took place. He claims he didn’t give her contact information to the defense (or anyone) both for her safety and because she had a lot of personal stuff going on at the time. He claims the deputy sheriff told his ex-wife to leave the scene because she was upset – hysterical. He also claimed that the deputy sheriff knew this woman well and knew her phone number.
  • He mentioned something about how he imagined the deputy wouldn’t want to change his story because he had drawn his weapon on the scene and therefore had to write a report about it. This part was very unclear to me, but what the defense was trying to imply was that the victim was afraid of the deputy sheriff for some reason, and that the deputy was why the victim was afraid to testify.

(at this point, I made a note in my notes that I just couldn’t wait for the prosecution’s cross examination. We’ve got a ways to go before that happens)

  • Neither the victim nor the police noticed any bullet holes on the evening of the shooting.
  • When asked if any women were upset with him at the time of the shooting, he replied “yeah, I guess.”
  • His 20ish women spanned all different descriptions (skin color, etc) and lived all over the bay area.
  • He did indeed tell the police who he thought shot at him on the scene, but he wasn’t certain. He was going by the vehicle, never saw the person clearly, and was working with his feelings instead of facts.
  • He called the defendant after the police left to find out if it had been her who shot at him.  He claims that he was then convinced it was not her who had shot at him. He claimed he either heard her kids in the car, or heard a certain radio station or something that convinced him.
  • The Victim and the Neighbor were pretty good friends and were involved in business together wholesaling cars. The deputy sheriff was “somewhat” involved in the business. Victim said he thought that the deputy might not want it known that he was associating with felons (like himself).
  • Victim admitted having been convicted of at least one drug-related felony in the past, and then admitted the “majority of his felonies” were drug-related. (victim conferred with his attorney a lot during this line of questioning).
  • Victim had indeed seen the deputy sheriff get high on at least one occasion using cocaine.

Prosecution Cross Examines:

  • How long was the Victim in a relationship with the defendant? Their son was born in ’03, so they sort of had a relationship in ’02, but they never really had much of a steady relationship.
  • Why was he looking under the hood of the parked car (a ’68 Buick Skylark)? Just because the motor was nice and newly rebuilt. He was not trying to leave town that day, he was not in fear of anyone at the time, and was not anxious or nervous when the deputy drove up.
  • The victim maybe/probably spoke with the defendant earlier that day (of the shooting), but they weren’t in a fight and he wasn’t threatened.
  • Victim admitted talking to the Inspector, but only in regards to getting the hold lifted off of his car. Said they didn’t speak about anything else. Victim didn’t want to spend too much time talking to him because he didn’t want to be labeled a snitch.  This was followed by some more invoking the 5th amendment.
  • Victim said one other of his baby mamas lived in the same town as the defendant, but he refused to name her or talk about her.
  • Victim claims the police report mis-characterized his statements.
  • The Inspector never came to talk to the victim while he was in custody.
  • At present, he does not believe the defendant was the shooter. He says he believes he does know who shot at him, but he won’t say who.

Next was something happened in our case which I think might be an uncommon procedure. If the jurors were unclear on something or had a burning question, they could write it down and it would be sent up to the judge where the judge and attorneys would decide whether it could be asked. I asked of the victim “if nobody had threatened you and you weren’t expecting to be shot at, what made you think that you were the victim in this shooting and not the Neighbor who was standing with you.” He replied that he had been in an argument earlier in the week with the defendant, and that the shooter’s car matched the general description of the defendant’s car. Those were the reasons why at the time he thought he was the victim and the defendant was the shooter. I was very surprised neither legal team had worked to address that question.

Next Post: I’ll try to wrap up the remainder of the testimony in the next post. Then there will be one or two posts of commentary and closing arguments, then we’ll get to the deliberations and the verdict.

Comments are closed.