Yesterday Judge Burdock handed down the sentencing to Michael McClish and a packed courtroom.
First there was discussion on whether or not the sentences would be consecutive or concurrent. That is, would the two murder sentences, along with his rape conviction, be served at the same time, or one after another. It seemed dumb (there is no other word for it) that they would even consider concurrent sentences. The Judge said that a decision would be made after the impact testimony. After some initial dialog between DA Jeff Rosell and Defense Attorney T. Wallraff, citizen impact testimony was heard.
First Mr. Rosell spoke about the brutal, senseless nature of the crime, for which McClish was found guilty of by a group of his own peers. Next up was Asha's mother in law, who gave a heartened account of her wonderful daughter in law, and the life shattering realization that she will never know her granddaughter. She was poised but emotional, and watching McClish nod in agreement with her as she spoke about this wonderful life snuffed out far too soon was aggravating.
The court also heard the words of Richard Veil, the father of the child, and Asha's husband. His words accompanied a slide show of Asha enjoying life, for which he explained that he wishes the court to honor Asha's memory by remembering her for these images, and not those from the crime scene. It was gripping listening to him speak, obviously even after all these years, the wound is still fresh. His words about how they met, how they moved to California and started their life together, and how she cared for him after he became injured without a second though just helped to illustrate her as a good life lost far before its time.
Lastly, a victims advocate read a statement prepared by Asha's parents half way across the world, who could not be there (and by all rights probably would not want to be). It was hard not to watch McClish's many supporters seated behind him sink slightly into their seats during the reading. While they were present to give support to a family member who had been found guilty time and time again, perhaps they hadn't thought about the family on the other side of this situation. Asha's parents halfway around the world who were helpless to support their daughter as she was no longer present to support. They had learned of their impending grandchild, and before that fantasy came to fruition they lost their child and grandchild in one fell swoop. Truly a situation I would not wish upon anyone, and they are living it. Whatever hardships the McClish family is going through, they pale in comparison to those faced by Asha's parents, family, and friends. There is no comparison.
And then McClish took the podium, wearing full Prison attire (an orange and white stripped getup) complete with matching bracelets (read: full shackles, ankles and all). He had multiple pages he read, loudly, seemingly proudly, with little emotion and absolutely no remorse. He started with maintaining his innocence. He said he was unfairly targeted by an overzealous Sheriffs Department, who despite thousands of man hours, outside experts, and State experts doing much of the collection and analyzation of the damning evidence, it is the Sheriffs that are to blame. He went on to explain that he and Asha were just friends, never anything more, and to remember her as an adultress only tarnishes her memory, and he wishes we wouldn't. He described her in detail as a great, wonderful, bubbly woman. He was only suppose to be allowed 5 minutes, stating this himself at the start of his 'testimony' but just describing how wonderful Asha was took longer than that.
McClish continued with how he is the victim, that he has lost his family, his wife, his children, etc etc etc. It was so hard to listen to him speak I wish he would have been cut off. The Judge was also clearly irked by his words, especially when McClish said that the Justice system is broken, and it has failed him. Judge Burdock's face was priceless at this statement. While he was clearly frustrated by McClish speaking negatively about the mismanagement of the Sheriffs Department and the DA's Office, when he called the integrity of the Justice System itself into question, Judge Burdock had a look on his face like he just ate the most sour thing imaginable (an entire bag or Warheads candy). McClish spoke more, but like I said, it was hard to listen to. There was mention of God, etc, etc, etc, who I am sure has some harsh words for McClish, though McClish would beg to differ.
No one else spoke for McClish.
Judge Burdock quickly explained to an incredulous McClish that he had given him the most fair trial he could ever have hoped for. The Jury pool was one of the more intelligent he had seen, representing a great, diverse cross section of our community. Truly a group of his peers. He excluded his prior rape convictions, assaults, threats, witness testimony about death threats, his actions with a hatchet and a woman's neck, and anything else (including allowing him to wear a suit even though he was currently a prisoner). He had his day in court. He had his fair chance. The Jury took nearly a week to reach a verdict, and he was satisfied with it after reviewing all of the evidence himself. Judge Burdock explained that he was found guilty, yet again, despite a group of 12 fresh minds that had no idea of McClish's past actions and behavior. So that is 24 peers that have now convicted him of some heinous crimes. Some of the most depraved, sickening and heartless crimes this community has seen. That he showed no remorse whatsoever during his statement. That the Sheriffs Office had done an amazing job investigating this case and that they deserve commendations for their thousands of hours and dedication to capturing a murderer. When he said he has no choice but to hand down the maximum sentence in all charges, McClish did not look shocked.
Life without the possibility of Parole (LWOP) for murder 1 in the killing of Asha. He was given 15 to life for the murder of the unborn child. He was given 1 year for the special allegation of using a weapon. All of these were to be served consecutively, to each other and to the 18 to life he is currently serving for the rape and sodomy of another woman he was found guilty of years ago.
He has to serve 18 to life before he can serve his life without parole, and then he can start to serve his 15 to life. And then he has one more year. Like I have been saying since the very start of this trial when people have asked my opinion, he will never see the outside of prison. That no one should have any misgivings about possible repercussions for testifying against him, because he can never get out to be a threat to them. I hope he is a Buddhist and believes in reincarnation because that is what it is going to take to ever see the outside of a jail.
A big thank you to Mr. Jeff Rosell, like Judge Burdock stated, you stated your case as clearly and concisely as humanly possible. You made all of the evidence continue to stack, logically, on top of itself until it was impossible to refute. You have done the community a great service, and I know you will continue to do so. The Justice system seems to work just fine from where I sat, keep up the good work and know that you have the community's support.
Judge Burdock, if for any reason I had to appear as a Defendant in a Courtroom (I wont! But we are playing 'What If') I hope you are the presiding Judge. You were more than fair every step of the way. You actually gave the Defendant a better chance at a Defense by excluding many damning testimony, evidence, prior convictions, and fact. Your rulings for even the most trivial of objections seemed logical to this layman, and you made a point to stop both Prosecution and Defense at times to restate in a more clear way when you could tell that they were losing the Jury. I think that making sure the Jury understood every word and statement muttered during the proceedings was a true benefit, something many Judges probably wouldn't take upon themselves. Thank you for your service to this community, and I will say hi next time I see you eating lunch downtown!
Team Patrick, Mr Patrick Murray and Mr Ian Patrick, you guys are killer. I sincerely hope that the two of you got a great sense of personal satisfaction seeing this case end after half a decade of serious work and long hours. You were both naturals in the Courtroom, Mr. Ian Patrick you were by far the most composed up in that Witness box, there wasn't a single pause, you had a loud commanding voice that everyone in the Court could hear, microphone or not, and I wish I was able to speak like that in public. Mr Patrick Murray, you are one amazing guy and I am glad you are in this community working hard to keep it safe(r) for all of us. I am glad to see the beard is back, it makes you look distinguished. From what I understand, Mr Ian Patrick will eventually be transferred out of the DA's Investigation post he is at (shame), but that you are a permanent position. If I in my life accomplish 10% of the good you will do, or probably already have done, for the community, I will die happy looking back on the effect my life had on society. So I envy you, and send my gratitude. So, Mr. Cool and Captain Amazing, I think Burdock was right, you and many of the Sheriffs that worked so damn hard for so damn long on this case deserve commendations. Or at the very least, a huge thank you from the community.
Mr Tom Wallraff, you Defended a man to the best of your ability. While I may have thought that some of your tactics, intentional or not, were a bit much, I would feel comfortable with you as my Defense. You fought tooth and nail, but there is only so much you can do when the evidence makes a verdict as apparent as it was in this case.
To everyone involved in the investigation of this case, Deputy Brzozowski, Deputy McDonald, Sgt Verinsky, Inspector Ramsey, Dr Haskall, Angela Meyers, Tom Fetor, Lara Walker, Sheriff Mata, Faye Springer, and all of the other unseen people that invested hundreds of hours into collecting and analyzing data for this case, THANK YOU! Our community is a tad bit safer and more bareable to live in because of your hard work. And a family half way across the world can start to get some closure on their daughters premature death.
Lastly I would say that I had originally wanted to go into Law Enforcement, but had changed paths in my life some years ago. Attending this trial day in and day out, interacting with the various Sheriffs and Investigators as I did here and there, has revitalized my passion for taking this route in life. So see you soon!
~Chris J Morello
Friday, March 30, 2012
Thursday, February 16, 2012
Court Meeting February 16, 2012
Today's court meeting was suppose to be the sentencing hearing, which had been previously postponed at the request of the Defense. They wanted time to investigate some of the Jurors. What their investigator supposedly found was that one of the Jurors knew second-hand about McClish being on trial for rape charges unrelated to his current case, and had told another Juror about it, from what I understand.
The Defense asked that the Jury's sealed documents be unsealed. The Prosecution, and later the Judge, pointed out that the Juror (#5) had revealed this information at the Jury Selection. That the Defense could have dismissed this Juror and chose not to. That the Defense had the opportunity to question this Juror, which they did, but did not pry into the subject for an extended period. That McClish himself was active in talking with his Defense Attorney T.W. during this selection, and could have voiced a concern, or asked that the Juror be removed through T.W. and did neither.
The Judge also explained that EVERYDAY in court, he began the proceedings by asking the Jury if they had been exposed to any outside information, and none ever expressed that they had. He closed the court EVERYDAY by saying that they are not to discuss the Trial with anyone outside of the courtroom, for any reason, under any circumstance, nor are they allowed to do any research outside of the court on any topic related to the case. Including the background of the Defendant. And that they are to notify the court if they, or any juror they know of, is exposed to any outside information, or if any juror exposes the rest of them to any outside information.
A Juror at one point in the trial overheard another Juror at lunch with his mother commenting about the trial. That juror was berated for this by the Judge, and I believe ultimately dismissed, though I cannot recall for certain. If such a small infraction, sharing some information with his mother, was cause for this Juror to be reported by another, and berated by the Judge, there is no doubt in my mind that if one Juror had shared outside knowledge, namely that McClish is a convicted [**serial**] rapist, that at least one, if not more, Juror would have come forward and reported it.
It was revealed that the indiscretion by one Juror in regards to sharing outside information with another Juror happened after the verdict. A unanimous Guilty verdict had already been reached before the information was shared -- which again, had already been disclosed even before the trial started, and the Defense had ample time to dismiss or raise concerns, and didn't. So this information had no bearing on the verdict. It could not have swayed the verdict, to imply such, as I believe the Defense was in order to get a retrial or mistrial, is like saying I could have had an effect on the outcome of WWII, when I wasn't even alive at the time. Idiotic.
The court order for the Juror Information Release was denied. The Defense attorney had ample chance to question Juror #5 about the knowledge of McClish's prior rape charges she had garnered from her Husband. He had the opportunity to dismiss her using a Peremptory Challenge, and didn't. T.W. attempted to say that he had used all of his Peremptory Challenge's, but it was noted that at the time of Juror #5 revealing the information he had some remaining and used them elsewhere.
Judge Burdick went on to discuss the rights of the Jurors themselves. Noting that they all expressed that they did not want to speak with the public, News, or anyone for that matter about the trial once it was over. They waited in the Courthouse until the public left after the verdict before they dispersed. They have a right to privacy, and he was not going to unseal their records as no evidence was given that it was necessary to encroach on their privacy. Their questionnaires were placed in the Court's sealed records (which in these questionnaires Juror #5 had written that she had been aware of a previous Rape allegation against Mr. McClish to some small degree). Further proof that this was a known factor dating back to the selection of the Jury.
One thing that all of us can take away from this is that as a Juror, especially one sitting on a murder trial, it is never okay to discuss the trial. Doing so with another Juror, even after the trial is over, can be grounds to delay or call for a mistrial. Under no circumstance would I ever speak about what went on during a trial to anyone, even years down the line.
McClish has tried to drag his feet from Day 1. He sought (and lost) several appeals to his rape convictions. He fired his Defense Attorney. Now he is attempting the same charade with his Murder conviction. There is another hearing coming up in which councils will not be present (Wednesday, February 22 at 9:00AM) where I am sure he will attempt to give grounds to fire his current attorney, maybe even try and say he was unfairly represented. More delays and charades. He has been found guilty many times over, and there are even several major crimes he hasn't been charged with that has clear cut evidence that would lead to an easy conviction; but there is little need when his guilt for the double murder is so easily seen by prosecutors -- and apparently the Jurors as well. He is a multiple offender, by my count he has over 4 strikes on his record, and you only need 3 in order to invoke a mandatory 25 years to life sentence in the State of California. There was never a doubt in my mind that he was guilty of everything he was charged with, this shouldn't come as a shock as I believe I disclosed these sentiments in my first post, and he got MORE than a fair trial.
In my eyes a fair trial would have allowed much of the evidence that was deemed inadmissible. He should have been disclosed as having been convicted of raping a female employee, as it goes to show his level of 'respect' for younger female employees he was surrounded by, including Mrs. Asha Veil. There was witness testimony that wasn't allowed that would have painted him more accurately than he was for the Jury, which would have swayed their opinion of him to the negative, and this was not allowed. His Defense Attorney, Mr. Thomas Walraff, in my opinion, represented him to the best of his ability. If I were ever to be on trial, even after watching all of these proceedings day in and day out, despite him losing this case, I would be more than comfortable having him represent me. He was very vocal in raising concerns with the slightest thing. He, from what I could tell, purposely mis-dated events in an attempt to trip up witness testimony. I thought it was unnecessarily sleazy, many probably thought it unintentional, but I would want the best possible Defense for myself. And that is what I think McClish got.
There is only so much you can do to Defend someone guilty of Rape and Murder from their rightful punishment. I believe T.W. gave McClish more than his fair Defense, and is continuing to try and do so, even after the Guilty verdict. But with how prepared DA Jeff Rosell has been, with the amount of evidence he and the large team of experts behind him have, there isn't really a Defense for a guilty man. Even the State went easy on him, when the Death Penalty should have been on the table. When further charges revealed during investigations and his prison stays arose, they weren't levied by the State.
No he got his fair day in court. He dragged his family through the spotlight and the mud during this whole process. For once in your life Mike, think of others before you act. Accept your guilt, as you and only you know you truly are, face your consequences like a man, and retreat to your jail cell for the remainder of your life where you know you belong. Further delays and appeals only keep this wound fresh for your family, let them and the people in this county heal, and quit being a drain on their tax dollars. You had your day in court, your peers saw your guilt, it's about time you do.
The Defense asked that the Jury's sealed documents be unsealed. The Prosecution, and later the Judge, pointed out that the Juror (#5) had revealed this information at the Jury Selection. That the Defense could have dismissed this Juror and chose not to. That the Defense had the opportunity to question this Juror, which they did, but did not pry into the subject for an extended period. That McClish himself was active in talking with his Defense Attorney T.W. during this selection, and could have voiced a concern, or asked that the Juror be removed through T.W. and did neither.
The Judge also explained that EVERYDAY in court, he began the proceedings by asking the Jury if they had been exposed to any outside information, and none ever expressed that they had. He closed the court EVERYDAY by saying that they are not to discuss the Trial with anyone outside of the courtroom, for any reason, under any circumstance, nor are they allowed to do any research outside of the court on any topic related to the case. Including the background of the Defendant. And that they are to notify the court if they, or any juror they know of, is exposed to any outside information, or if any juror exposes the rest of them to any outside information.
A Juror at one point in the trial overheard another Juror at lunch with his mother commenting about the trial. That juror was berated for this by the Judge, and I believe ultimately dismissed, though I cannot recall for certain. If such a small infraction, sharing some information with his mother, was cause for this Juror to be reported by another, and berated by the Judge, there is no doubt in my mind that if one Juror had shared outside knowledge, namely that McClish is a convicted [**serial**] rapist, that at least one, if not more, Juror would have come forward and reported it.
It was revealed that the indiscretion by one Juror in regards to sharing outside information with another Juror happened after the verdict. A unanimous Guilty verdict had already been reached before the information was shared -- which again, had already been disclosed even before the trial started, and the Defense had ample time to dismiss or raise concerns, and didn't. So this information had no bearing on the verdict. It could not have swayed the verdict, to imply such, as I believe the Defense was in order to get a retrial or mistrial, is like saying I could have had an effect on the outcome of WWII, when I wasn't even alive at the time. Idiotic.
The court order for the Juror Information Release was denied. The Defense attorney had ample chance to question Juror #5 about the knowledge of McClish's prior rape charges she had garnered from her Husband. He had the opportunity to dismiss her using a Peremptory Challenge, and didn't. T.W. attempted to say that he had used all of his Peremptory Challenge's, but it was noted that at the time of Juror #5 revealing the information he had some remaining and used them elsewhere.
Judge Burdick went on to discuss the rights of the Jurors themselves. Noting that they all expressed that they did not want to speak with the public, News, or anyone for that matter about the trial once it was over. They waited in the Courthouse until the public left after the verdict before they dispersed. They have a right to privacy, and he was not going to unseal their records as no evidence was given that it was necessary to encroach on their privacy. Their questionnaires were placed in the Court's sealed records (which in these questionnaires Juror #5 had written that she had been aware of a previous Rape allegation against Mr. McClish to some small degree). Further proof that this was a known factor dating back to the selection of the Jury.
One thing that all of us can take away from this is that as a Juror, especially one sitting on a murder trial, it is never okay to discuss the trial. Doing so with another Juror, even after the trial is over, can be grounds to delay or call for a mistrial. Under no circumstance would I ever speak about what went on during a trial to anyone, even years down the line.
McClish has tried to drag his feet from Day 1. He sought (and lost) several appeals to his rape convictions. He fired his Defense Attorney. Now he is attempting the same charade with his Murder conviction. There is another hearing coming up in which councils will not be present (Wednesday, February 22 at 9:00AM) where I am sure he will attempt to give grounds to fire his current attorney, maybe even try and say he was unfairly represented. More delays and charades. He has been found guilty many times over, and there are even several major crimes he hasn't been charged with that has clear cut evidence that would lead to an easy conviction; but there is little need when his guilt for the double murder is so easily seen by prosecutors -- and apparently the Jurors as well. He is a multiple offender, by my count he has over 4 strikes on his record, and you only need 3 in order to invoke a mandatory 25 years to life sentence in the State of California. There was never a doubt in my mind that he was guilty of everything he was charged with, this shouldn't come as a shock as I believe I disclosed these sentiments in my first post, and he got MORE than a fair trial.
In my eyes a fair trial would have allowed much of the evidence that was deemed inadmissible. He should have been disclosed as having been convicted of raping a female employee, as it goes to show his level of 'respect' for younger female employees he was surrounded by, including Mrs. Asha Veil. There was witness testimony that wasn't allowed that would have painted him more accurately than he was for the Jury, which would have swayed their opinion of him to the negative, and this was not allowed. His Defense Attorney, Mr. Thomas Walraff, in my opinion, represented him to the best of his ability. If I were ever to be on trial, even after watching all of these proceedings day in and day out, despite him losing this case, I would be more than comfortable having him represent me. He was very vocal in raising concerns with the slightest thing. He, from what I could tell, purposely mis-dated events in an attempt to trip up witness testimony. I thought it was unnecessarily sleazy, many probably thought it unintentional, but I would want the best possible Defense for myself. And that is what I think McClish got.
There is only so much you can do to Defend someone guilty of Rape and Murder from their rightful punishment. I believe T.W. gave McClish more than his fair Defense, and is continuing to try and do so, even after the Guilty verdict. But with how prepared DA Jeff Rosell has been, with the amount of evidence he and the large team of experts behind him have, there isn't really a Defense for a guilty man. Even the State went easy on him, when the Death Penalty should have been on the table. When further charges revealed during investigations and his prison stays arose, they weren't levied by the State.
No he got his fair day in court. He dragged his family through the spotlight and the mud during this whole process. For once in your life Mike, think of others before you act. Accept your guilt, as you and only you know you truly are, face your consequences like a man, and retreat to your jail cell for the remainder of your life where you know you belong. Further delays and appeals only keep this wound fresh for your family, let them and the people in this county heal, and quit being a drain on their tax dollars. You had your day in court, your peers saw your guilt, it's about time you do.
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
Verdict
A verdict has been reached. In the case of Asha, McClish was found guilty of First Degree Murder. In the case of her unborn child, McClish was found guilty of Second Degree Murder. It has taken half a decade, but what little justice Asha's family could expect out of such a heinous crime has been served. A big thank you from everyone in the Valley to Mr. Jeff Rosell, Mr. Patrick Murray, Mr. Ian Patrick, Judge Burdick, Faye Springer, Lara Walker, Mr. Mata, Mrs. Meyers, Verinsky, Gidding, Ramsey, Brzozowski, and the countless others that spent months upon months working on this case and seeing it through to the end.
This case truly divided the town of Ben Lomond, and hopefully now that this chapter has come to a close we can all move past it. My heart goes out to Asha's family. This verdict wont bring her back, but hopefully some sense of justice will be felt, if not for the fact that the man who ended her life so prematurely will never see freedom, than for the idea that he can never again harm a female.
This case truly divided the town of Ben Lomond, and hopefully now that this chapter has come to a close we can all move past it. My heart goes out to Asha's family. This verdict wont bring her back, but hopefully some sense of justice will be felt, if not for the fact that the man who ended her life so prematurely will never see freedom, than for the idea that he can never again harm a female.
Wednesday, November 23, 2011
The Prosecution Closing, Part 2?
**Sorry if this is getting confusing, since his 'first' closing arguments were broken down into 4 parts. After TW made his closing statements, DAJR was given the opportunity to speak again, as per law, as explained by TW in his closing arguments that the Prosecution gets to go AGAIN after him.
DAJR TORE THE DEFENSE APART. This was truly the end of the case, he left no doubt, he went through TW's statements one by one, accentuating the falsities and ridiculousness of it all.
"Skillful argument to make you fearful of returning a verdict." -DAJR directly to the Jury. He was direct, obviously heated, and went on to explain how his statements tried to do this (the just of one: ~"There was that 9 loci DNA profile on the rope the Prosecution checked CODIS for a match. It is still in the CODIS database, still being searched. Wont you feel terrible if you return a verdict of Guilty, and years later CODIS turns up a match for that profile? I mean you may have convicted an innocent man in that case."). He really did try to instill fear and doubt through 'what ifs' and gross speculation.
**DAJR then came back to TW's statement about "the Prosecution makes arguments about evidence that aren't proven." Explaining that TW went on to make arguments about evidence that aren't proven, just as he warned the Jury against. And even worse, TW made arguments against evidence that IS PROVEN. DAJR tore him up for this BADLY. I was watching TW for his reaction and he looked emotionally beat, he knows this trial is coming back with a guilty verdict, he is probably just wondering on which count so that he can continue to prepare for their appeal.
**I have notes for it, but I am sure at which point during DAJR's closing it occurred: McClish turned around to his family in the stands, and shrugged with his arms completely outstretched in a manner so obvious the Jury couldn't have missed it. The look on his face was equal parts 'this is over,' 'F-me,' 'sorry guys.' He knows he is guilty. He must know the Jury is leaning towards it. I would say it is the point he truly lost all hope.
**When talking directly about TW, DAJR said that he uses small mistakes (like one testimony that said 1.2% and not 0.12%) to attempt to show that ALL of their testimony was untrustworthy. DAJR said he could do this too, say for example: when TW spoke about the witness that identified Asha's car in a 'sound lineup' of 4 vehicles, as well as by its "headlights." That in fact when he said the "headlights were similar, it was not actually the headlights but the taillights he identified as being similar. People make mistakes (he pointed at TW) it doesn't mean they are trying to shift or sway the opinion of the Court." It was great. He was saying I could stoop to your level, TW, but I am above that because it is petty. Now here is an example of how I could be petty like you. I was laughing, and the Jurors seemed equally as amused. I didn't take notes after this point because of the speed with which DAJR was talking. In this moment more than any other in the trial, he really showed that pedigree he has, and his father was there to see it which was truly awesome. He was perfectly in his element, completely comfortable, and it showed in spades. Honestly I feel like his talents might be wasted being a DA in a small county like Santa Cruz. I know he is a native, but I think if he moved to a larger court no one could say they didn't expect it. Certainly no one could resent it.
DAJR TORE THE DEFENSE APART. This was truly the end of the case, he left no doubt, he went through TW's statements one by one, accentuating the falsities and ridiculousness of it all.
"Skillful argument to make you fearful of returning a verdict." -DAJR directly to the Jury. He was direct, obviously heated, and went on to explain how his statements tried to do this (the just of one: ~"There was that 9 loci DNA profile on the rope the Prosecution checked CODIS for a match. It is still in the CODIS database, still being searched. Wont you feel terrible if you return a verdict of Guilty, and years later CODIS turns up a match for that profile? I mean you may have convicted an innocent man in that case."). He really did try to instill fear and doubt through 'what ifs' and gross speculation.
**DAJR then came back to TW's statement about "the Prosecution makes arguments about evidence that aren't proven." Explaining that TW went on to make arguments about evidence that aren't proven, just as he warned the Jury against. And even worse, TW made arguments against evidence that IS PROVEN. DAJR tore him up for this BADLY. I was watching TW for his reaction and he looked emotionally beat, he knows this trial is coming back with a guilty verdict, he is probably just wondering on which count so that he can continue to prepare for their appeal.
**I have notes for it, but I am sure at which point during DAJR's closing it occurred: McClish turned around to his family in the stands, and shrugged with his arms completely outstretched in a manner so obvious the Jury couldn't have missed it. The look on his face was equal parts 'this is over,' 'F-me,' 'sorry guys.' He knows he is guilty. He must know the Jury is leaning towards it. I would say it is the point he truly lost all hope.
**When talking directly about TW, DAJR said that he uses small mistakes (like one testimony that said 1.2% and not 0.12%) to attempt to show that ALL of their testimony was untrustworthy. DAJR said he could do this too, say for example: when TW spoke about the witness that identified Asha's car in a 'sound lineup' of 4 vehicles, as well as by its "headlights." That in fact when he said the "headlights were similar, it was not actually the headlights but the taillights he identified as being similar. People make mistakes (he pointed at TW) it doesn't mean they are trying to shift or sway the opinion of the Court." It was great. He was saying I could stoop to your level, TW, but I am above that because it is petty. Now here is an example of how I could be petty like you. I was laughing, and the Jurors seemed equally as amused. I didn't take notes after this point because of the speed with which DAJR was talking. In this moment more than any other in the trial, he really showed that pedigree he has, and his father was there to see it which was truly awesome. He was perfectly in his element, completely comfortable, and it showed in spades. Honestly I feel like his talents might be wasted being a DA in a small county like Santa Cruz. I know he is a native, but I think if he moved to a larger court no one could say they didn't expect it. Certainly no one could resent it.
Defense Closing Statement
"The Judge said at the start of the trial not to judge the trial by how many witnesses are called by either side, and I am going to ask that you not judge by the length of closing arguments."
**Yes, this was TW's opener in his closing statement. Brought to you by the same guy that opened the trial by saying that he could sit on his side of the courtroom silent. Not ask any questions of the witnesses called by the prosecution. Not call any witnesses of his own. Not call the defendant to testify on his own behalf. And if the Jury feels that the Prosecution has not proven all of the elements in the case that it is their civic duty to return a verdict of not guilty. Genius.
**TW went on to talk about the impact the murder had on the community, and the big deal it was for Law Enforcement in a small county. And that somehow this made them rush the investigation and falsely point it at McClish. But the trial is taking place 5 years after the murder occurred, can anyone explain to me how that is rushed? I guess if you take into account part of those 5 years were spent on the rape, sodomy and intent to harm charges that he was investigated for, tried for, and convicted by a group of his own peers on. But the defense couldn't bring that up, now could they?
**In talking about Brzozowski starting the probe of Michael McClish in this case on false information (the idea that McClish was the father of Asha's unborn child), TW says that the investigation was falsely focused on McClish from the start, and that evidence was shoe-horned to paint him as the murderer. BUT McClish AND Asha both thought that McClish was indeed the father, or at least that it was a strong possibility. McClish eluded to Melissa that he COULD be the father of the child, even months after Asha's body was found. Not only was TW's point here shaky, it was a fallacy. IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT MCCLISH WAS NOT THE FATHER OF THE CHILD, ONLY THAT HE THOUGHT HE WAS.
**Another joke of an argument that TW used to paint McClish as an innocent man is how unprepared he was for Brzozowski's questions focusing on why Asha might think he was the father, after McClish had just told Brzozowski that they did not have an intimate relationship. Really, so lying poorly to the Police is an indication of innocence? If anything it is an indication of perjury and obstruction of justice. TW is worried about McClish being painted as a guilty man because of his past convictions, but he readily provides some of his crimes, and the attempt to conceal those crimes, as his defense (driving on a suspended license: violation of California Vehicle Code 14601, carries mandatory jail time and is considered a misdemeanor when the license was suspended for a DUI conviction, as McClish's was. Lying to investigators is obstruction of justice, which also means jail time). So he is offering up crimes that the Defendant committed as possible reasons for innocence? But the Jury cant hear about his prior charges a Jury of his peers convicted him of? Even when said convictions are directly related to this case? Going back to the idea that him being unprepared to lie about his relationship with Asha is an indication of innocence: Him not being prepared could merely be (and is more likely to be) because he was arrogant enough to think that Asha had not told others of their affair. He thought it was a secret still, that nothing from the crime would point back to him. But when it did (as Brzozowski inquiring as to the reason why Asha thought her child belonged to him suggests) he began acting strangely, and covering up or distancing himself from any aspect surrounding the murder. If anything I would say his actions during Brzozowski's inquiry and his subsequent actions point at guilt and nothing else.
**TW went on to talk about Darkness vs. Sunset. Again, I was rolling my eyes, and most of the Jury seemed to as well, because those of us that live in the Valley know, it gets dark here much earlier than anywhere nearby. Official sunset times for Santa Cruz City would be off by hours if applied to the Valley, because IT IS A VALLEY that runs mostly North/South, and the eastern ridge blocks light... There was even testimony, that the DEFENSE CALLED, that explained that it gets dark, and really dark, much earlier up Love Creek than elsewhere in Santa Cruz County. A side note here, when TW was addressing the Jury here, he made a joke about Twilight, the 'popular' 'vampire' franchise. So while DAJR ends the trial with emotion, seriousness, and vivid pictures of a heinous crime, TW is laying out pop culture jokes. One Juror cracked a smile, the rest looked disgusted. And what was he thinking? Most of the Jury is older. IF THEY EVEN KNOW WHAT TWILIGHT IS, they will think the joke is in poor taste with even poorer timing, and if they don't know what Twilight is, they will just think he is a jackass. Attempting to mimic DAJR's bond with the Jury, this late in the game, through a poor attempt at humor furthers my opinion that the Defense has been grasping at straws since day 1. If anything you look like a sleezeball. And I am sorry to say this because I am sure TW is a fine and decent person (even if he is a Lawyer!), and he has tried his best to put up a defense (even if it was based on confusing the Jury and those that testified with fudging dates CONSTANTLY), but he had nothing to work with. He can't put McClish on the stand, his family wont allow it because they know how poorly it went during the rape trial. And deep down, they must know he is guilty, as offering himself up to DAJR's questions would prove his guilt in a matter of seconds. Really, "So have you ever been convicted of a crime, Mr McClish?" /trial over.
TW said "the tarp particles [found on Asha's body and in McClish's truck] are distinguishable. And that DAJR saying that they are indistinguishable doesn't make it so." **Yes, I agree here. But the expert witness that testified they were indistinguishable DOES MAKE IT SO.**
"Mike is evil, and stupid" -This is a direct quote from TW. Don't believe me? Get court transcripts for 11/22/11.
**TW goes on to say that the Prosecution makes arguments about evidence that aren't proven. And then TW goes on to make arguments about evidence that aren't proven, and even worse arguments against evidence that IS PROVEN. Winner.
**In talking about Love Creek Road, TW says that people notice changes to it, it is not remote, and the body wouldn't have gone unnoticed. Thank God the defense isn't held to the same standards as the Prosecution! Why, even though this is blatantly untrue for anyone that knows Ben Lomond, does it matter? The answer is it doesn't. And if Love Creek isn't remote, that makes Santa Cruz a huge metropolitan city rivaling the likes of Tokyo.
**In regards to contamination of evidence, which TW spent a good deal of time on, he says that just because DAJR asked every person testifying that was involved with the investigation of the case about procedures, if they were followed to the letter, about chains of custody, locked doors, access to X piece of evidence, etc, doesn't mean there wasn't contamination. The only example he brings up as evidence of possible contamination is (I believe it was) Mata's shoe wear. He wore shoes at the scene Asha's body was found. He wore shoes at the Morgue. He wore shoes at the CSI garage. Clearly a bunch of evidence was transferred from his shoes to McClish's truck. Only when Mata was at the scene the body was found, the body was already fully enclosed in a body bag. So not evidence could have been cross contaminated from there. Mata has boots specifically at the morgue, used only at the morgue, and they are cleaned with bleach regularly. Clearly nothing hitched a ride on those shoes since they never left the morgue. And Mata was 'inside' McClish's truck, I believe TW's example was when he cut swatches from the passenger seat in the presence of Lara Walker, but his feet were never in the truck when he did that. Think about it, imagine yourself outside the passenger door of a truck. Now you want to cut section of the butt of the seat. Would you get inside of the truck, sitting/standing/kneeling in the legroom area, or would you be standing outside the truck, reaching in with your arms to cut the swatch? Standing outside is the obvious, more comfortable choice. It is also the more logical choice for an investigator collecting evidence while trying not to contaminate. So reason, common sense, goes to show he was outside the truck reaching in only with his arms. So how then does his footwear come to contaminate the truck. How do foxtails hitch a ride on his boots after miraculously falling off the victim, and then miraculously fall off his boots at the precise time they were [never] in the truck. and embed themselves in such a way that Lara Walker has to pry them lose from the carpeting that the drying blood has adhered them to? The answer, for anyone with common sense, is that they don't.
**Then TW went on to ask the Jury to think back at the demeanor of all of the people testifying when being asked questions by him vs. DAJR. He says they were in good spirits when answering DAJR's questions but not his own. I shed a tear for your hardships TW. This really came off like a child saying, "but they are mean to me!" Pathetic attempt to paint the testimony of seasoned expert witnesses as biased towards DAJR. And lets take a minute here, and even if we assume this is the case, what reason would they have to be short with TW? Could it be his asinine lines of questioning. His intentionally, and repeatedly fudging dates/times in an obvious attempt to confuse the witness, paint them as unreliable, and confuse the Jury? Maybe his constant assertions that there was contamination of the evidence due to their negligence, even though there is no proof of it, could be a reason why he might have perceived them having a poor demeanor with him. And there are expert witnesses that he could have called to get a different take, as some of the expert witnesses like Dr. Haskall testify 50/50 for the defense/prosecution, but there wasn't a different take to be had.
**TW then addressed the possibility of intentional evidence plants. I wont even lend this credence by going into it, other than to say it's absurd.
"It's not about where they found Asha's blood, it's where it wasn't found." -TW
**So it doesn't matter that a murder victim's blood was found in the car of someone that had motive? Someone that met with the victim the night they were killed? Someone that was about to be confronted by a situation that in the past they had made death threats over? Agree to disagree I guess TW, just realize it is probably 99.95% of the population that disagrees with you.
**Yes, this was TW's opener in his closing statement. Brought to you by the same guy that opened the trial by saying that he could sit on his side of the courtroom silent. Not ask any questions of the witnesses called by the prosecution. Not call any witnesses of his own. Not call the defendant to testify on his own behalf. And if the Jury feels that the Prosecution has not proven all of the elements in the case that it is their civic duty to return a verdict of not guilty. Genius.
**TW went on to talk about the impact the murder had on the community, and the big deal it was for Law Enforcement in a small county. And that somehow this made them rush the investigation and falsely point it at McClish. But the trial is taking place 5 years after the murder occurred, can anyone explain to me how that is rushed? I guess if you take into account part of those 5 years were spent on the rape, sodomy and intent to harm charges that he was investigated for, tried for, and convicted by a group of his own peers on. But the defense couldn't bring that up, now could they?
**In talking about Brzozowski starting the probe of Michael McClish in this case on false information (the idea that McClish was the father of Asha's unborn child), TW says that the investigation was falsely focused on McClish from the start, and that evidence was shoe-horned to paint him as the murderer. BUT McClish AND Asha both thought that McClish was indeed the father, or at least that it was a strong possibility. McClish eluded to Melissa that he COULD be the father of the child, even months after Asha's body was found. Not only was TW's point here shaky, it was a fallacy. IT DOES NOT MATTER THAT MCCLISH WAS NOT THE FATHER OF THE CHILD, ONLY THAT HE THOUGHT HE WAS.
**Another joke of an argument that TW used to paint McClish as an innocent man is how unprepared he was for Brzozowski's questions focusing on why Asha might think he was the father, after McClish had just told Brzozowski that they did not have an intimate relationship. Really, so lying poorly to the Police is an indication of innocence? If anything it is an indication of perjury and obstruction of justice. TW is worried about McClish being painted as a guilty man because of his past convictions, but he readily provides some of his crimes, and the attempt to conceal those crimes, as his defense (driving on a suspended license: violation of California Vehicle Code 14601, carries mandatory jail time and is considered a misdemeanor when the license was suspended for a DUI conviction, as McClish's was. Lying to investigators is obstruction of justice, which also means jail time). So he is offering up crimes that the Defendant committed as possible reasons for innocence? But the Jury cant hear about his prior charges a Jury of his peers convicted him of? Even when said convictions are directly related to this case? Going back to the idea that him being unprepared to lie about his relationship with Asha is an indication of innocence: Him not being prepared could merely be (and is more likely to be) because he was arrogant enough to think that Asha had not told others of their affair. He thought it was a secret still, that nothing from the crime would point back to him. But when it did (as Brzozowski inquiring as to the reason why Asha thought her child belonged to him suggests) he began acting strangely, and covering up or distancing himself from any aspect surrounding the murder. If anything I would say his actions during Brzozowski's inquiry and his subsequent actions point at guilt and nothing else.
**TW went on to talk about Darkness vs. Sunset. Again, I was rolling my eyes, and most of the Jury seemed to as well, because those of us that live in the Valley know, it gets dark here much earlier than anywhere nearby. Official sunset times for Santa Cruz City would be off by hours if applied to the Valley, because IT IS A VALLEY that runs mostly North/South, and the eastern ridge blocks light... There was even testimony, that the DEFENSE CALLED, that explained that it gets dark, and really dark, much earlier up Love Creek than elsewhere in Santa Cruz County. A side note here, when TW was addressing the Jury here, he made a joke about Twilight, the 'popular' 'vampire' franchise. So while DAJR ends the trial with emotion, seriousness, and vivid pictures of a heinous crime, TW is laying out pop culture jokes. One Juror cracked a smile, the rest looked disgusted. And what was he thinking? Most of the Jury is older. IF THEY EVEN KNOW WHAT TWILIGHT IS, they will think the joke is in poor taste with even poorer timing, and if they don't know what Twilight is, they will just think he is a jackass. Attempting to mimic DAJR's bond with the Jury, this late in the game, through a poor attempt at humor furthers my opinion that the Defense has been grasping at straws since day 1. If anything you look like a sleezeball. And I am sorry to say this because I am sure TW is a fine and decent person (even if he is a Lawyer!), and he has tried his best to put up a defense (even if it was based on confusing the Jury and those that testified with fudging dates CONSTANTLY), but he had nothing to work with. He can't put McClish on the stand, his family wont allow it because they know how poorly it went during the rape trial. And deep down, they must know he is guilty, as offering himself up to DAJR's questions would prove his guilt in a matter of seconds. Really, "So have you ever been convicted of a crime, Mr McClish?" /trial over.
TW said "the tarp particles [found on Asha's body and in McClish's truck] are distinguishable. And that DAJR saying that they are indistinguishable doesn't make it so." **Yes, I agree here. But the expert witness that testified they were indistinguishable DOES MAKE IT SO.**
"Mike is evil, and stupid" -This is a direct quote from TW. Don't believe me? Get court transcripts for 11/22/11.
**TW goes on to say that the Prosecution makes arguments about evidence that aren't proven. And then TW goes on to make arguments about evidence that aren't proven, and even worse arguments against evidence that IS PROVEN. Winner.
**In talking about Love Creek Road, TW says that people notice changes to it, it is not remote, and the body wouldn't have gone unnoticed. Thank God the defense isn't held to the same standards as the Prosecution! Why, even though this is blatantly untrue for anyone that knows Ben Lomond, does it matter? The answer is it doesn't. And if Love Creek isn't remote, that makes Santa Cruz a huge metropolitan city rivaling the likes of Tokyo.
**In regards to contamination of evidence, which TW spent a good deal of time on, he says that just because DAJR asked every person testifying that was involved with the investigation of the case about procedures, if they were followed to the letter, about chains of custody, locked doors, access to X piece of evidence, etc, doesn't mean there wasn't contamination. The only example he brings up as evidence of possible contamination is (I believe it was) Mata's shoe wear. He wore shoes at the scene Asha's body was found. He wore shoes at the Morgue. He wore shoes at the CSI garage. Clearly a bunch of evidence was transferred from his shoes to McClish's truck. Only when Mata was at the scene the body was found, the body was already fully enclosed in a body bag. So not evidence could have been cross contaminated from there. Mata has boots specifically at the morgue, used only at the morgue, and they are cleaned with bleach regularly. Clearly nothing hitched a ride on those shoes since they never left the morgue. And Mata was 'inside' McClish's truck, I believe TW's example was when he cut swatches from the passenger seat in the presence of Lara Walker, but his feet were never in the truck when he did that. Think about it, imagine yourself outside the passenger door of a truck. Now you want to cut section of the butt of the seat. Would you get inside of the truck, sitting/standing/kneeling in the legroom area, or would you be standing outside the truck, reaching in with your arms to cut the swatch? Standing outside is the obvious, more comfortable choice. It is also the more logical choice for an investigator collecting evidence while trying not to contaminate. So reason, common sense, goes to show he was outside the truck reaching in only with his arms. So how then does his footwear come to contaminate the truck. How do foxtails hitch a ride on his boots after miraculously falling off the victim, and then miraculously fall off his boots at the precise time they were [never] in the truck. and embed themselves in such a way that Lara Walker has to pry them lose from the carpeting that the drying blood has adhered them to? The answer, for anyone with common sense, is that they don't.
**Then TW went on to ask the Jury to think back at the demeanor of all of the people testifying when being asked questions by him vs. DAJR. He says they were in good spirits when answering DAJR's questions but not his own. I shed a tear for your hardships TW. This really came off like a child saying, "but they are mean to me!" Pathetic attempt to paint the testimony of seasoned expert witnesses as biased towards DAJR. And lets take a minute here, and even if we assume this is the case, what reason would they have to be short with TW? Could it be his asinine lines of questioning. His intentionally, and repeatedly fudging dates/times in an obvious attempt to confuse the witness, paint them as unreliable, and confuse the Jury? Maybe his constant assertions that there was contamination of the evidence due to their negligence, even though there is no proof of it, could be a reason why he might have perceived them having a poor demeanor with him. And there are expert witnesses that he could have called to get a different take, as some of the expert witnesses like Dr. Haskall testify 50/50 for the defense/prosecution, but there wasn't a different take to be had.
**TW then addressed the possibility of intentional evidence plants. I wont even lend this credence by going into it, other than to say it's absurd.
"It's not about where they found Asha's blood, it's where it wasn't found." -TW
**So it doesn't matter that a murder victim's blood was found in the car of someone that had motive? Someone that met with the victim the night they were killed? Someone that was about to be confronted by a situation that in the past they had made death threats over? Agree to disagree I guess TW, just realize it is probably 99.95% of the population that disagrees with you.
Prosecution Closing (part 3 cont.- part 4)
Asks Wife to Lie
Why only the night of the 9th?
Why only for a few hours?
Why only for a few hours?
Why not for other times?
Why does it match the time of the murder?
Why does it match the time of the murder?
**In regard to the excuse he gave Melissa to lie on his behalf:
The idea that McClish wanted Melissa to lie to the police about him being gone on the night of Saturday the 9th because of the implications (him driving on a suspended license) is bogus. He drove Sunday morning to the dump, and did not ask that she lie about that. So why would it matter if he was driving illegally less than 12 hours before, but not 12 hours later? Because he knew the time of death and was trying to Alibi up.
DAJR made it clear that there is coincidence, upon coincidence, upon coincidence in this case, all of which point at McClish being guilty. He met with Asha the night she died. He had motive. He had the tools of her death on hand. He had the temper required for such an egregious offense. He made threats to other females in the past that directly mirror the circumstances of Asha's death. He asks his wife to lie to police so he has an alibi for the time of the murder, before anyone but the killer knew it was a murder. He tries to distance himself from Asha by asking two of his mistresses to lie about his level of involvement with her. He tries to distance himself from the scene of the crime by calling the person that hired him for a job on Love Creek Road, less than 0.6 of a mile from where Asha was found, and canceling said job. He washed his car at a rate that would make anyone with severe OCD think he's crazy. He washed all of his clothes (hat included) that he wore September 9th just days after, when his entire house is littered with dirty laundry. Yeah that last one might seem a little shaky, but as DAJR stated, you must not look at each piece of evidence on its own. When you start to look at all of it in unison, it points to one conclusion: they are actions of a guilty man.
The Defense went out of their way to bring up the never found tarp and murder weapon. Let's talk about this. The first thing any murderer would do, as I have said before, is get rid of the murder weapon and anything the body came into contact with. McClish's dump run on Sunday COULD be coincidence, but it could also point to him getting rid of the weapon and tarp. McClish washing his truck could just be him washing his truck, or as the Defense tried to paint it, being a good father by engaging in a fun activity with his son. But if that's the case, it only explains him washing it on the 14th. What about the 12th when he washed it immediately after being interviewed by Brzozowski? What about the 13th? What about washing it TWICE, back to back, on the 14th? What about him using a power washer on it? Coincidence, Coincidence, Coincidence the Defense would have you believe.
And what about the Defense saying, "Look, Mr. McClish's answer to Brzozowski's question about the possibility of him being the father of Asha's unborn child was asinine, we can all agree about that." ~BUT it goes to show his innocence, because had he killed her don't you think he would have been prepared for such a question? ready with a better answer?~
**No, it does not show innocence. It goes to show he didn't think anyone else knew about his affair with Asha, or that he could be the father, or that she had told others that she planned to confront him about DNA testing to determine paternity. The Defense also went out of their way to say that the investigation focused on McClish because of a falsity, that he was the father (which he was not). What he doesn't say is that at the time, McClish THOUGHT he was the father, or at least the possibility that he was. Asha thought he was the father, a FACT proven time and time again by witness testimony from her pregnancy councilor, and her longtime friend whom she talked to about it frequently. Whether he was in fact the father or not is a moot point, all that matters is that both he and Asha thought he was (or again, could be). This lends credence to the idea that his motive in killing her was to protect his relationship with his wife and avoid public disgrace.
**This is really the most depressing facet of this case. He killed her because she was asking for child support, for a DNA test. Him undergoing the test would mean him admitting that he had an affair with her. With Melissa's clear stance on infidelity, it would mean the end of his marriage. So to protect himself, he killed Asha. Well it turns out that the child wasn't his. Had he not acted on his rage, Asha and her child, Richard's child, would be alive today. McClish might not still be married to Melissa, but he is divorced from her anyway.
Brandi and Angela
Two independent sources.
Not friends.
Don't hang out.
Didn't share info.
Everything comes out the same.
**Here DAJR went over how Brandi and Angela corroborated one another's information, and characterizations perfectly, all while having not conferred with one another. They had nothing to gain in the situation. But they both had a lot to lose, and yet they gave the information they did, and again both backed up the information given by the other, independently.
Angela
Before body found talks to her on the 13th.
Asks her to lie.
Deny connection to Asha.
Eliminate motive and opportunity.
Brandi
Before body found talks to her on the 13th.
Asks her to lie.
Deny connection to Asha.
Eliminate motive and opportunity.
**As said above and in other posts, but just to reiterate, McClish's actions prior to the body being found all point to guilt. Asking someone to lie to the police on your behalf in regards to an ongoing missing person's case should raise some red flags. All of his actions between September 10th and the 14th show a man desperate to distance himself from a murder victim, before anyone else knows a murder took place. His lies to Angela, Melissa and Brandi can all be explained by the idea that they are the actions of a murderer trying to eliminate himself from any opportunity to have committed said murder. Coincidence?
Washed truck
[September] 12, 13, 14, 14.
Mountain truck.
Obsessive level of behavior.
Vic's blood in truck.
Washed truck
Blood only found on inside of truck, not outside.
Washed hat
House filthy.
Why does this get cleaned.
Two items related to the murder washed.
Body found
Connected yb time and location
Woodcutting job near body
Defendant later distanced himself.
"the body was dumped in a familiar area, he had a short time to make critical decisions. You go with what you know" - DAJR
Major points:
Too many lies.
Cleaned too many murder items.
Too connected to the body location.
Acting guilty.
Can't be a coincidence.
Science
Killing without trace evidence difficult.
Every event will leave evidence.
Forensic evidence:
DefDNA on rope/noose.
DefDNA on Asha's steering wheel.
Asha's blood in Def truck.
Tarp particles in truck on / on body.
Locations of vegetation.
**DAJR talked a lot about how great it is to live in this day and age, when 20 years ago there was no such thing as DNA evidence. That Juries would have had to come to a verdict without it, and he made sure to stop before the Scientific evidence and say that ~there is enough evidence here to convict him, BUT we have scientific evidence to stack on top of all the other evidence~.
DNA rope:
DefDNA is on murder rope.
1 in 123,000.
STR 1 in 1600.
YSTR 1 in 95.
**DAJR went over the numbers/statistics with DNA. He said that according to the YSTR on the rope, there is a 1 in 95 likelihood that the DNA found under the tape on the rope would match anyone, and McClish did. This was untrue, as YSTR testing (Y chromosome short tandem repeat) can only be conducted for males, as females do not have Y chormosomes (well most don't, but we live in Santa Cruz and a sizable portion of the females here seem to). So it is 1 in 95 for males, but 1 in 190 for the general public, lowering his "slightly above 1%" (1.05%) probability to 0.53%. Granted, such a heinous crime is rarely committed by a female, however saying that only 1% of the population would match this DNA profile is untrue, the probability is half that. Following this logic, 1 in 123,000 only accounts for males. Accounting for the whole population, that probability (taking into account the ~24% the DOJ Agents for 'error') we reach 1 in 246,000 (very rough number).
**Ruling out females from the whole number goes against logic, in my mind. Yes we know the DNA found on the rope was male due to the presence of the Y chromosome. Therefore the pool for possible killers is only that of males. However it should have either been stated that the chance of any MALE having a match to the DNA found on the rope was 1 in 123,000, not that the chance anyone from the public would, as that number would have been somewhere around 1 in 246,000.
DNA Steering Wheel
DefDNA is on Asha's Steering wheel.
1 in 130,000
Asha Body Evidence
Tarp particles.
Bloody foxtails.
knot type.
Truck Evidence
Numerous bloody foxtails.
Asha's blood in truck.
Hair in truck.
Tarp particles.
Positive blood screens inside truck.
Foxtails and Vegetation
Six are matches for Asha's DNA.
~REG-15#6 A+B from vacuum of truck.
~LW15
~JMM-7#7, #9, #10
Additional bloody vegetation items:
~JMM-7#5, #1, #2.
Tarp Particles
Asha's body particles match truck tarp particles.
Independent link.
Asha's hair in truck
1 in 690.
Not Defendant's hair.
Contamination
Asha's blood in truck.
DefDNA to murder rope/noose.
DefDNA to steering wheel of vic's car.
**relevant quote said by DAJR quoting Dr Mason: "I don't know where all this God damn contamination talk is coming from, there is no contamination." **DAJR went over the photo composites provided by Lara Walker showing the same region of McClish's truck at 3 points in the investigation, focusing on the foxtails in order to show that even though they weren't collected immediately, they were present from the time they impounded his truck to the time they were collected. They weren't planted months into an investigation.
Combine all circumstance of death evidence
Combine all science evidence
Combine all relationship evidence
Combine all cover-up evidence
Reasonable doubt:
Not 100% certainty.
Doubt based on reason.
Real Evidence that undermines reasonable doubt.
Must relate to an element.
Homicide
1st degree
2nd degree
Voluntary manslaughter
Homicide:
1st degree:
Death of another.
Malice-express.
willful, deliberate, premeditated.
2nd degree:
Death of another.
Malice-express or implied.
Murder
Malice of aforethought:
Express: intent to kill
**DAJR was getting very emotional at this point when he talks about intent to kill in regard to this case. He went over that the murderer beat this pregnant woman, and THEN and only then placed a noose around her neck and choked the life out of her and her child. It seemed genuine, but as we have not seen any emotion like this from him before it really caught me off guard. I could see some of the Jurors felt similar by their reactions. I think he is genuinely disgusted that anyone could do this, especially to someone they had a relationship with, and who wouldn't be. He used this to illustrate that the crime MUST be murder with express intent to kill, as the killer put a noose around Asha's neck after she had already sustained what were fatal injuries, and the person placing/tightening said noose knew they were taking two lives with that action. Disgusting.
Murder
Malice of aforethought:
Implied- Intentional act,
Dangerous to life,
Knew act is dangerous,
Did it anyway.
**DAJR's example to illustrate this is a person with a gun shooting at a passing train. You know it's a dangerous act. You know people are inside that train, and are subject to danger by you shooting at it. If one of your bullets killed a person inside, the shooter did not pick that person out for death, but they died due to actions that any sane, rational person knows could and would result in death. Clearly Asha was singled out. Clearly she was the intended victim and the murderer knew their actions would end her life. Obviously this case falls under murder in the first degree.
Caused death of another
A fetus is a human being.
8 weeks is enough.
Doesn't have to know fetus exists to be punished.
**It was obvious that McClish knew Asha was pregnant, as that was his motive. But DAJR was covering what California state law says on the subject. The killer does not need to know the woman is pregnant to be prosecuted for its murder, but the fetus must be at 8 weeks or later, Asha's child was 7+ months. She was visibly pregnant. DAJR was just covering his bases here, this aspect of the case was a no brainer.
First Degree Murder
Willful: Intent to kill.
Deliberate: Weighed considerations.
Premeditated: Decided before death.
Premeditated:
Decided before completing the acts that caused death.
Willful, Deliberate, Premeditated
No specific time.
Can be quick.
Varies from person to person, circumstance to circumstance.
Extent of reflection not time.
**This case cannot be anything other than 1st degree murder because the act of placing a noose around a fatally injured person and choking the life out of them is premeditated. Premeditation does not require that the person plan acts over the course of months, weeks, days or even hours. The time he took between beating her, and going into his truck to grab a rope to choke her with is premeditation. He had to think about getting the rope next. He had to go get it. He had to walk back to her with it. He had to put it around her neck. He had to tighten it. Several considerations took place during this time, and none of them stopped his actions. Premeditated indeed.
If you do not find evidence of planning and premeditation...
2nd Degree Murder:
Malice aforethought.
Express: Intent to kill
Implied intentional
Voluntary Manslaughter
2nd degree murder but in the heat of passion.
Heat of Passion:
-Def was sufficiently provoked AND
-Provocation caused Def to act rashly AND
-Provocation caused intense emotion AND
-Obscured reasoning or judgment AND
-Would have caused the same reaction in the average person
--ALL MUST BE TRUE FOR IT TO BE CONSIDERED THE HEAT OF PASSION
**You mistress confronting you about taking responsibility for your child is not sufficient provocation. It would not illicit the same reaction in the average person.
Heat of Passion:
Does he get a break?
DAJR: "As a society, are we going to give a break to a married man when he kills his pregnant mistress?"
**Nope. And I know Santa Cruz County is full of hippies, but pulling the death penalty off the table was nonsense, and is giving him a break. I wish Jury nullification could work in the opposite direction! If I were sitting on this Jury, and watched this case unfold, my time spent in the deliberation room would be used to convince the other Jurors not that this was murder in the 1st degree, because such a conclusion is obvious, but rather that we wanted to see the death penalty exacted for such a heinous and deliberate crime. It is not that some people deserve to die, it is that some people do not deserve to live.
Heat of Passion:
Can't set up his own code of conduct.
Slight or remote provocation not enough.
Consider the average person.
Provocation: Asha provoked her own death?
Blinded by Emotion
Provocation caused Def to act rashly and under influence of intense emotion.
Average person:
Objective standard.
Average Law Abiding Citizen.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Prosecution Closing (part 1-3 of 4)
**Today the Prosecution started their closing arguments after a very long, drawn out, and tedious discussion about Jury Instructions, out of the presence of the Jury. The closing arguments by DAJR were accompanied by a power point display right by the Jury, focusing on his main points. I tried my best to get the just of what he said down, but after copying what was projected it was difficult to keep up. What appears in the text boxes are exactly what was displayed by the projector. Anything appearing in quotes below is what DAJR said during that slide. Anything encompassed by ~ is me attempting to paraphrase, and as usual anything inside **'s are my own comments and did not appear in court. **
~ This was a brutal, senseless, violent murder of two people. We've been together for weeks hearing witness testimony, evidence, the attorneys speaking, and you have received court instructions. But make no mistake, this is not an intellectual exercise. This is not an academic exercise. You have seen all of these witnesses testify, but you will never see Asha Veil or her child because that man over there (**He points at Michael McClish) brutally murdered her. You have had a chance to see why this happened, and who did this. Brandi told us how McClish threatened her by saying if she ever disclosed the affair he would kill her. Words from his own mouth about what he was going to do and how. The pieces of this case reinforce all other pieces. You have seen pictures trying to show why, how, who committed this crime."
**The first slide was a large oval with 4 subjects at respective quarters, starting from the top and going clockwise, "Circumstances of Death," "Relationships," "Cover-Up," and "Science."
"I want you to think about how she was murdered."
"Someone put a rope around her neck and choked the life out of her, this was not an instant death."
"Her last meal was lunch on 9-9-06. Mr. Algrove testified that she ate fried rice and Chinese chicken for lunch, and the autopsy revealed that was all that was in her stomach. **He ate lunch with her, McClish, and a fourth person that day.**
**DAJR addressed how McClish knew the area the body was dumped at.**
~Between February and May there were 30 phone calls between the Defendant and Asha.~
**Here DAJR talked about McClish lying to Brzozowski at the start of the investigation, when it was still just a missing persons case. Brzozowski knew McClish had been intimate with Asha (because the pregnancy councilor told him about Asha thinking McClish was the father, and her pursuing DNA testing). McClish lied about it three times in that one interview, pointing the investigation more towards him, and it ended with McClish's excuse of "Well when you drink like I do, sometimes things get hazy, and I get forgetful, etc etc..." when asked why Asha thought he might be the father.**
**His statements to his then-wife Melissa also became a huge factor, as he asked her to lie about his whereabouts on the night of September 9th, before Asha's body was discovered. DAJR repeated several times "only the killer knew the significance of this date, at this time." And "only the killer knew at this point she was dead" when McClish was already running damage control trying to minimize his perceived involvement with Asha AND the area the body was found (he called and canceled the job he previously accepted on Love Creek Road in an attempt to distance himself from the crime scene).**
~The councilor showed Asha's intent to determine the father of her unborn child through DNA Paternity testing. She required 4 samples be tested: Her, child, Richard, McClish. She planned on confronting McClish about the testing and to ask for his sample. This testimony showed Asha's intent to talk to McClish about their affair, and the possibility of him being the father.
~This was the last call made by Asha's cell phone (**Technically it made 3 more calls post-mortem, but they were under 60 seconds and were attempts to check the voicemail. This was the last time SHE made a call**). She practiced her conversation confronting McClish about paternity testing, and possible child support. The conversation ended when Asha said, "here he comes, I have to go."~
**DAJR went over the corroborating video for the time and location of both Asha and McClish at Ben Lomond Market. He displayed these for everyone to see, both of them were in the same photo. It correlates to the time Asha punched out of work perfectly, showing her time card was accurate. Also showed was the last picture ever taken of Asha, she was wearing the backpack that was later found with her belonging in it.**
What was at stake?
**DAJR called these threats "Prophetic." Used them to allude to the fact that Asha confronted him with paternity testing, which would out his affair and end his marriage, he would lose his family.
**DAJR addressing Jury: "Talking about the threats to Brandi, with them in mind, knowing what we know about Asha's confrontation with McClish, how would it go?"
**DAJR talked about how fortunate we are that her car was found as quickly as it was. And that her body was found AT ALL (Hildenbrand noticed disturbed dirt on the side of a road AND had the curiosity to see what, if anything, was down below) because of the remote area it was finally found in. Which again, reinforced the idea that McClish's threats to Brandi were actually carried out on Asha.
"Asha was dead within hours, it was not a coincidence."
~We know she met with McClish because video puts them both at BLM at the same time. On top of that Asha's call to Mila, and how it ended, further corroborates that they did in fact meet up that night.
**McClish lied to his wife about working at the Glen Arbor property under motion lights. There were, are, nor have there ever been any motion lights at that property, as we heard during the testimony of the owner.**
**A lot of the evidence on its own does not show guilt. Together, as DAJR has described, it is like a textbook murder, and each piece of evidence supports the others. The first thing you, I, or anyone with an IQ above 12 that is arrogant enough to kill someone would do is get rid of the evidence. Be it the murder weapon, a tarp you wrapped the body in, or the vehicle used to dump the body, the murderer will try and erase anything that links their involvement to the crime. McClish's suspicious behavior after September 9th can all be explained by deducing he is the killer. Of course you would wash the hat and clothes you wore that night you killed So and So, even though your home is literally COVERED in dirty laundry, those things must be washed IMMEDIATELY. Of course you would go to the dump the morning after to get rid of evidence. Of course you would talk to two of the girls you were having affairs with and ask them [and lets be honest, I sincerely doubt he 'asked' them, it was probably akin to a loan shark 'asking' for his money back] to lie to the Police about you seeing the Murder-e outside of work, in isolated areas. Of course you would wash your truck, that truck you never washed in 9 years of marriage, 4 times in 3 days.**
**The Defense will say that the tarp material particles found on Asha were never matched to a tarp in McClish's possession, even though the same particles were found in his truck cab. The Defense will say that the Prosecution never found the murder weapon. The Defense will say that because of this, McClish obviously wasn't the killer. But let us again be honest with ourselves, it only proves he managed to get rid of them. Because of his behavior we have already had it proven that he was distancing himself from this murder investigation before it was a murder investigation. Getting rid of the murder weapon is priority #1, followed by anything the body came into contact with (hi, tarp). Next you would want to clean. I don't know why, but McClish chose to clean what he wore when he killed Asha instead of getting rid of it, and then cleaned the outside of his truck frivolously. Just to reiterate, not finding the tarp or murder weapon does not show innocence, just the ability to throw away 2 items no one at the dump would ever question.
**Most of this was covered in the above. But DAJR went into the emotions expressed by McClish to Melissa during this time, describing him as emotionally needy, touchy, etc.**
**Mostly addressed above, he did everything he could, including asking others to engage in Perjury on his behalf, a Felony crime in the US that holds a prison sentence up to 5 years. And going back to Brzozowski's problems interviewing him where he lied multiple times about being intimate with Asha, correcting himself in the end by stating that he was a sloppy, forgetful drunk.
**I have stated this before on Topix as well as this blog. The fact that McClish knew the significance of the night of September 9th, 2006, before Asha's body was even found, is evidence enough to point the investigation square at him. Only the killer knew she was dead at that time. Only the killer knew she died September 9th. And the NIGHT of September 9th is the only date McClish asking for cover. DAJR said, and I quote "actions of a guilty man, a murderer, THE murderer."
~ This was a brutal, senseless, violent murder of two people. We've been together for weeks hearing witness testimony, evidence, the attorneys speaking, and you have received court instructions. But make no mistake, this is not an intellectual exercise. This is not an academic exercise. You have seen all of these witnesses testify, but you will never see Asha Veil or her child because that man over there (**He points at Michael McClish) brutally murdered her. You have had a chance to see why this happened, and who did this. Brandi told us how McClish threatened her by saying if she ever disclosed the affair he would kill her. Words from his own mouth about what he was going to do and how. The pieces of this case reinforce all other pieces. You have seen pictures trying to show why, how, who committed this crime."
**The first slide was a large oval with 4 subjects at respective quarters, starting from the top and going clockwise, "Circumstances of Death," "Relationships," "Cover-Up," and "Science."
Circumstances of Death
Major points:
Attack shows murderous intent.
Small window of death.
"I want you to think about how she was murdered."
Murderous intent:
Two methods of death:
Short range weapons,
It was not an instant death.
Blows to the face.
Defensive wounds.
"Someone put a rope around her neck and choked the life out of her, this was not an instant death."
Small Window of Death:
9-9-2006
Established by:
Phone call (7:42-7:50).
Asha's car being located (9-10-06).
Bug expert.
Stomach contents
"Her last meal was lunch on 9-9-06. Mr. Algrove testified that she ate fried rice and Chinese chicken for lunch, and the autopsy revealed that was all that was in her stomach. **He ate lunch with her, McClish, and a fourth person that day.**
The Body Was Moved
What would you expect to find?
Remote area.
Body dumped.
Valuables left behind.
No sexual assault.
**DAJR addressed how McClish knew the area the body was dumped at.**
Relationship
Major points:
There is a connection.
Explains why he would do it.
Explains subsequent actions.
Relationship exists:
Brandi
Angela
Cemetery/Old County Road
Defendents phone calls
~Between February and May there were 30 phone calls between the Defendant and Asha.~
Defendant's statement:
Statement to Brzozowski
Statement to Wife
**Here DAJR talked about McClish lying to Brzozowski at the start of the investigation, when it was still just a missing persons case. Brzozowski knew McClish had been intimate with Asha (because the pregnancy councilor told him about Asha thinking McClish was the father, and her pursuing DNA testing). McClish lied about it three times in that one interview, pointing the investigation more towards him, and it ended with McClish's excuse of "Well when you drink like I do, sometimes things get hazy, and I get forgetful, etc etc..." when asked why Asha thought he might be the father.**
**His statements to his then-wife Melissa also became a huge factor, as he asked her to lie about his whereabouts on the night of September 9th, before Asha's body was discovered. DAJR repeated several times "only the killer knew the significance of this date, at this time." And "only the killer knew at this point she was dead" when McClish was already running damage control trying to minimize his perceived involvement with Asha AND the area the body was found (he called and canceled the job he previously accepted on Love Creek Road in an attempt to distance himself from the crime scene).**
Pregnancy Councilor
Only shows Asha's intent.
Confrontation.
~The councilor showed Asha's intent to determine the father of her unborn child through DNA Paternity testing. She required 4 samples be tested: Her, child, Richard, McClish. She planned on confronting McClish about the testing and to ask for his sample. This testimony showed Asha's intent to talk to McClish about their affair, and the possibility of him being the father.
Mila's Phone Call
Last call.
Within hours she was dead.
Practice conversation.
~This was the last call made by Asha's cell phone (**Technically it made 3 more calls post-mortem, but they were under 60 seconds and were attempts to check the voicemail. This was the last time SHE made a call**). She practiced her conversation confronting McClish about paternity testing, and possible child support. The conversation ended when Asha said, "here he comes, I have to go."~
**DAJR went over the corroborating video for the time and location of both Asha and McClish at Ben Lomond Market. He displayed these for everyone to see, both of them were in the same photo. It correlates to the time Asha punched out of work perfectly, showing her time card was accurate. Also showed was the last picture ever taken of Asha, she was wearing the backpack that was later found with her belonging in it.**
What was at stake?
One strike rule (Melissa's policy of any affair and she is gone).
Defendant's wife said she would, "take the kids and leave."
Threats to Brandi
"If you tell, certain things will happen to you."
"Your kids wont have a mother."
"No one will find your body"
"Nothing will come between me and my family."
**DAJR called these threats "Prophetic." Used them to allude to the fact that Asha confronted him with paternity testing, which would out his affair and end his marriage, he would lose his family.
**DAJR addressing Jury: "Talking about the threats to Brandi, with them in mind, knowing what we know about Asha's confrontation with McClish, how would it go?"
**DAJR talked about how fortunate we are that her car was found as quickly as it was. And that her body was found AT ALL (Hildenbrand noticed disturbed dirt on the side of a road AND had the curiosity to see what, if anything, was down below) because of the remote area it was finally found in. Which again, reinforced the idea that McClish's threats to Brandi were actually carried out on Asha.
The Meeting Happened
Store Video [**should have been 'Bank Video,' as BLM NEVER provided security footage to the Investigators**].
Call to Mila.
Met on night of murder.
"Asha was dead within hours, it was not a coincidence."
~We know she met with McClish because video puts them both at BLM at the same time. On top of that Asha's call to Mila, and how it ended, further corroborates that they did in fact meet up that night.
Cover Up
Major Points:
All before body found.
Only killer would know.
If Defendant wasn't involved he would not be doing this.
September 9, 2006.
7:00 Michael McClish tells his wife Melissa he will be gone 5 minutes.
7:34 Defendant and Asha together on surveillance video.
7:34 Asha clocks out of work.
7:36 Asha walking out of BLM with her backpack on, last photo ever taken of her.
7:42 Asha calls Mila, 8.5 min conversation.
7:57 Defendant calls home and lies to his wife.
8:30 Defendant checks voicemail.
8:48 Defendant calls home
9:00 Defendant arrives home.
Lies at the time of murder
Lies to his wife.
Yard work and motion lights.
**McClish lied to his wife about working at the Glen Arbor property under motion lights. There were, are, nor have there ever been any motion lights at that property, as we heard during the testimony of the owner.**
Right after murder
Within 13 hours of the murder he is at the dump.
Missing tarp.
**A lot of the evidence on its own does not show guilt. Together, as DAJR has described, it is like a textbook murder, and each piece of evidence supports the others. The first thing you, I, or anyone with an IQ above 12 that is arrogant enough to kill someone would do is get rid of the evidence. Be it the murder weapon, a tarp you wrapped the body in, or the vehicle used to dump the body, the murderer will try and erase anything that links their involvement to the crime. McClish's suspicious behavior after September 9th can all be explained by deducing he is the killer. Of course you would wash the hat and clothes you wore that night you killed So and So, even though your home is literally COVERED in dirty laundry, those things must be washed IMMEDIATELY. Of course you would go to the dump the morning after to get rid of evidence. Of course you would talk to two of the girls you were having affairs with and ask them [and lets be honest, I sincerely doubt he 'asked' them, it was probably akin to a loan shark 'asking' for his money back] to lie to the Police about you seeing the Murder-e outside of work, in isolated areas. Of course you would wash your truck, that truck you never washed in 9 years of marriage, 4 times in 3 days.**
**The Defense will say that the tarp material particles found on Asha were never matched to a tarp in McClish's possession, even though the same particles were found in his truck cab. The Defense will say that the Prosecution never found the murder weapon. The Defense will say that because of this, McClish obviously wasn't the killer. But let us again be honest with ourselves, it only proves he managed to get rid of them. Because of his behavior we have already had it proven that he was distancing himself from this murder investigation before it was a murder investigation. Getting rid of the murder weapon is priority #1, followed by anything the body came into contact with (hi, tarp). Next you would want to clean. I don't know why, but McClish chose to clean what he wore when he killed Asha instead of getting rid of it, and then cleaned the outside of his truck frivolously. Just to reiterate, not finding the tarp or murder weapon does not show innocence, just the ability to throw away 2 items no one at the dump would ever question.
Acting different:
Melissa described McClish as different following September 9, 2006.
Angela described McClish as different following September 9, 2006.
**Most of this was covered in the above. But DAJR went into the emotions expressed by McClish to Melissa during this time, describing him as emotionally needy, touchy, etc.**
The Store Interview
Minimizes connection with Asha.
Admits he is the potential father.
**Mostly addressed above, he did everything he could, including asking others to engage in Perjury on his behalf, a Felony crime in the US that holds a prison sentence up to 5 years. And going back to Brzozowski's problems interviewing him where he lied multiple times about being intimate with Asha, correcting himself in the end by stating that he was a sloppy, forgetful drunk.
After the Store Interview:
No one knows she is dead.
Asks wife to lie.
Asks for specific alibi.
Eliminating opportunity.
**I have stated this before on Topix as well as this blog. The fact that McClish knew the significance of the night of September 9th, 2006, before Asha's body was even found, is evidence enough to point the investigation square at him. Only the killer knew she was dead at that time. Only the killer knew she died September 9th. And the NIGHT of September 9th is the only date McClish asking for cover. DAJR said, and I quote "actions of a guilty man, a murderer, THE murderer."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)