Lonnie Franklin was walked in at 9.10am wearing black glasses, a light blue shirt, a blue tie and black trousers.
At 9.18am Judge Kennedy walked in and took the bench.
It was a completely full Courtroom, you couldn't even squeeze a mouse in today. On the left side of the gallery, retired Detective Paul Coulter and retired Detective Dennis Kilcoyne were both sitting next to each other near the front. There was a lot of media presence and 2 cameras.
Before the Jury came in, the Judge talked about the exhibits she will and won't be allowing in to evidence. She ended saying that that the "Objection is sustained regarding these items".
Before the Jury came in she let the Counsels speak and Beth Silverman was the first one to do so:
D.A: "Your Honour, The Defense took the books that were meant for the Jury and took them apart and then put them back together and now they are not in the order which we had marked them in. Half of them are upside down and backwards and it hasn't been corrected".
Amster: "It's my understanding that it was corrected. Maybe The People can let us know exactly what the problem is so we can correct it".
This was about it from Amster's side, no craziness because, according to his statement from last week, he is a 'changed man'! Ha! We will see about that.
The Jury came in from the proper Jury entrance today at 9.23am.
The Judge welcomed the Jury as she always does and explained the Jury Instructions. This took just under 40 minutes and there was more which she said she would say later. She turned it over to Beth Silverman to begin her Closing Arguments:
D.A: "Morning ladies and gentlemen. 10 young women, all of them brutally murdered by that man - the Defendant Lonnie Franklin - and one woman, Enietra Washington, who barely escaped that tragic fate. Now I told you in Opening Statements exactly what the evidence would be. And that is exactly what has been presented to you over these past few months. Now here in Closing Arguments I'm going to talk to you about the evidence that was presented, the Law that the Judge provided to you just now and how those fit together. It's your job in this case to decide whether the Defendant is guilty of the crimes and special allegations charges described in this case regarding the 11 victims who are the subject of this Trial. So how do we know who committed these crimes? None of the victims can tell you. They can't tell you themselves because they have no voice. No voices to tell us. The Defendant took their voices when he brutally murdered each of them. So who or what can tell us what happened? The evidence in this case. And the evidence in this case speaks very clearly. You just have to listen to what the evidence tells you. The evidence in this case is the voice of the victims who can no longer speak for themselves. So listen to the evidence.
....... (testimony here will be in my book) You also heard that from 2007 - 2010 more and more evidence emerged all pointing to one person as the killer. This Defendant. As you heard an LAPD surveillance team including Detective Art Stone and Detective Frank Trujillo followed the Defendant in July of 2010. On July 5th they followed him to John's pizza in Buena Park and you heard that Det. Stone went into the restaurant, and after speaking to the manager first, they seroptociusly collected items from the Defendant. Those items were then transported to LAPD's Crime Lab where they were analyzed by Surpria Rosner. She developed full single source DNA profiles, one was from the Defendant's napkin and another was from a piece of his left over pizza. This DNA profile matched in every location with the DNA profiles developed from the oral swab from Barbara Ware and sperm fraction and the Defendant's record sample. The statistical calculation for this match was 1 in 11 quintillion that's 1 with 18 zeros.
All but one had cocaine and alcohol in their system except for the youngest, Princess Berthomieux. They were all found with their clothes in diss-array, partially clothed usually. They were all found in alleys or in dumpsters surrounded with trash. They were all within 3 1/2 - 4 miles of the Defendant's home.
As you learned throughout the course of this Trial, the Defendant is a serial killer and hiding in plain sight. He blended in. He lived in the community. He lived at this address where a search warrant was served 1728 West 81st street since 1986. He worked in the South Los Angeles community driving trash trucks for the Department of Sanitation. Prior to that he worked at LAPD's garage down in Los Angeles, right under their noses. He dumped his victims like trash in alleys and trash bins. Almost all of the bodies in this case, as you saw, were concealed and hidden under debris, gas tanks, under mattresses, behind bushes in dumpsters inside trash bags. Several of the victims, as you saw, were missing their underwear or their bras or their shoes. Some, like Princess Berthomieux, Alicia Alexander and Janecia Peters were found completely naked! There was no identification on or around any of the bodies at any crime scene. All of them were shot with a 25 automatic firearm or strangled to death. The ones who were shot were shot in the chest except for Janecia Peters who was shot in the back. The women who were shot in the chest, the bullet wounds were all with the same trajectory - left to right, front to back and straight down. 8 of them were shot with the same 25 automatic firearm.
You've heard that Janecia Peters who was shot also with a 25 automatic firearm and it was found in the Defendant's home during a search warrant along with boxes and boxes of 25 auto ammunition. Yet no 25 calibre cartridge cases were found at any of the crime scenes which you would expect.
All but Princess Berthomieux tested positive for cocaine. Most had consumed alcohol prior to their deaths and we called the testimony of one of the Defendant's best friends, Ray Davis, who testified that the Defendant told him that he would always keep alcohol and drugs on hand for 'his girls'. And, of course, all of these crimes were connected to the Defendant by forensic evidences.
We saw that the Defendant concealed and hid his victims bodies over and over and over and over and over again. Barbra Ware under a gas tank and other debris. Bernita Sparks in a trash dumpster. Mary Lowe behind bushes. Alicia Alexander and Lacrecia Jefferson under a mattress. Princess Berthomieux in bushes and Janecia Peters inside a dumpster and a trash bag".
She went on to talk about the difference between first and second degree murder. She emphasized that these victims "they are not just dead bodies that you've seen throughout this Trial who have been depicted in photographs, because we can never do them Justice. These victims were all human beings, they suffered from the same frailties, the same imperfections that all humans do. They also had the same hopes and the same dreams for their futures that we all have. Each of them deserve to be treated like human beings. None of them deserved to be murdered and dumped like trash as if their lives had no meaning".
She went on to talk about 'implied malice' and the fact that these murders were 'deliberately performed'. There's a difference between 'implied malice' and 'expressed malice'. She gave a perfect analogy.
D.A: "Someone who goes to a park with a crowd of people and has no intention to kill anybody but he thinks it would be fun to shoot his gun into the air. This person shoots his gun into the air and a bullet comes down and hits and kills someone. That would be an example of 'implied malice'. The person didn't intend to kill anybody. The act that he performed was clearly dangerous. There were people in the park and he disregarded those lives. At a minimum, strangulation and/or shooting the victims in this case in the chest definitely fits the description of 'implied malice' but clearly these acts demonstrate 'express malice' as well. So let's talk about what that is".
She went on to explain in great detail what 'express malice' is.
She focused on how he leaves every night and prowls the area of South Los Angeles to look for women. He would 'creep' out to find his victims.
D.A: "He got away with murder 8 times between 1985 and 1988. That's 8 times in 3 years"!
It seems that science was the only thing to stop this serial killer.
Ms Silverman put each of the victims and the crime scenes up on the Elmo, one by one. It was devastating to the victims' family members and sometimes became to much to bear and a number of them broke down in tears at having to relive, yet again, the brutal murder of their loved ones. She explained that there was sooting and/or stippling found on the clothing of these women which explains the fact that these murders were all pre-meditated, willful and deliberate because they were all done at very close range. Some murders and crime scenes were only one block apart yet they were sometimes 20 years apart. They were associated with the same gun and DNA which linked the murders. "Is that merely another coincidence"? She said with a true sense of confidence in her voice.
D.A: "This Defendant was shooting to kill he wasn't playing games".
She talked about the only surviving victim, Enietra Washington, who had lost 20% of all the blood in her body when she became the Defendant's victim. However she lived. Enietra provided the blue print for all the other murdered women who cannot speak for themselves.
She explained in great detail, when Lonnie Franklin was interviewed by Detective Kilcoyne and Detective Coulter on July 7th 2010, that the Defendant was smug and laughed them off. A few times he would make rude disrespectful comment saying one of the women was 'fat' and the other was 'butt ugly'! She pointed out that the same disrespect and disregard was shown "when he dumped their bodies in filthy alleys, under dirty mattresses or in trash bags and thrown in dumpsters". He also did what nobody who is innocent would do, he laughs!!! He makes jokes even when there are pictures of 10 women in front of him who had been brutally murdered! In the face of that, he laughs! There are 10 dead women staring up at him and he's laughing in their faces"!
"He demonstrates over and over again in that interview, such callous disregard for their lives. When he was asked if he'd seen the billboards around Los Angeles and on Western, near the Defendants home, that his friend Ray Davis talked about, he jokes about the media calling him the Grim Reaper (I think she meant the Grim Sleeper here), he thinks it's funny. As if being given a monicker of being a serial killer is something that you would laugh at"? And he's amused when Detective Kilcoyne refers to him as a 'Billboard celebrity'. Because that is of course what he wants to be, right?
When asked if he owns any guns, he listed several. Such as the 22 rifle, the 38 revolver, the 9mm revolver and a 22 pistol. He said he has no other guns, those are the only guns he has. Yet he conveniently forgets to mention the 25 auto. The gun he used to kill Janecia Peters. When he was asked specifically about the 22 pistol he even joked and played dumb.
She closed her powerful Closing Arguments and thanked the Jury and Courtroom and then sat down. The Judge then called for Mr Amster to start his Closing Arguments. This will be interesting I thought. Nobody could top what Ms Silverman just did, least of all the most unprofessional lawyer that has ever lived.
Amster: "Your Honour, Ladies and members", ooops I mean, ladies and gentlemen". Yes he even made a blunder on his opening line!
Amster: "I want to say that... I want to thank each and every one of you for the commitment you have given this case. It has not been easy. I would also like to apologize on behalf of myself and the Defense team..."
What?? Why the Defense team too? What did Dale Atherton ever do wrong or the other lovely lady that sits their daily who is also putting up with his crap??? Her name is Kristen Gozowa. She and Dale have both behaved brilliantly so how dare he bring them in to his craziness!
He went on.
Amster: "... but I think mostly on behalf of myself for any drama, maybe inproper things that you witnessed. This has not been an easy case. It has been our job to get the evidence that we felt is necessary to present to you. Now it's your job to utilize this evidence as you deem fit. Each of the evidence in this case had a role to play: The Defense to present one side of the case and obey the law and the Government to present their side of the case. Many individuals believe that it is the Defense teams job to get the Defendant off. No, it's our job to question the Government's ethics. Tomorrow we could be legislated right out of existence. There might not have to be Defense Attorneys in the Courtroom. But we have chosen as a Country to have that. And as long as we, as a community, have chosen to do that, it is up to us as Defense Attorneys to do our job within the Law. It might not always be pretty but it's what we are obligated to do because we too also have taken an Oath to the Constitution. So all that we have done in this case is.. WE... JUST... WANTED... TO... DO... OUR... JOB!
As I stated it is our job to challenge the Government to make sure that they have proved their case, so that you can make a determination on this case, its only you. It's only you that can make that determination, your interpretation on what matters, it's nobody else's, it is yours.
No entity or person likes to be criticized. Those who are part of the Government, they don't like to be criticized. You heard the Government make their position on how the evidence should be interpreted. But it's only one in one interpretation and it really doesn't matter in this case what their interpretation is because this is a case that is based on 'circumstantial evidence'. Let me start off by explaining to you what 'circumstantial evidence' means".
Oh here we go.... he's going to go off now on how all the incredible amount of overwhelming evidence which has been brought in to evidence in this case, proving that the Defendant is the Grim Sleeper, is all just 'circumstantial evidence'. If he tries to do this then he really is the blundering buffoon that we all knew he was from the start. He should start a business with David Lamagna as they would make the most perfect team.
There was silence, then more silence as he shuffled and paced across the floor back to his seat and then back to the Lectern. He was obviously looking for something. So we all waited. Whatever h was looking for, it took a long time to find All of us were looking at each other as if to say, "Really? Again, with his total unprofessionalism"?
Amster: "I'm sorry, I can't seem to find it". Laughing hysterically!
Judge: "Well why don't you just give them the instructions on whatever number it is? 2.00"?
Amster: "2.00 states...." and he went on "Evidence is either direct or circumstantial evidence...." This went on and on explaining the difference. Yet we are talking about a serial killer! Someone who committed the same crime, on different women, time and time again with the same M.O!! Arghhhh!
Amster: "Other than Enietra Washington, the rest is 'circumstantial evidence'" What? Where has he been this entire Trial?
He even made a ridiculous analogy:
Amster: "One example of 'circumstantial evidence' is you are in a Courtroom and all of a sudden you see a lot of people walk in with umbrellas which are wet. Wet umbrellas? That's a pretty good idea that it's raining outside. That's 'circumstantial evidence'. You don't see the rain, but you know from seeing umbrellas and seeing that they are wet, it's probably raining. So the evidence are wet umbrellas that lead to the conclusion that it's raining. That's 'circumstantial evidence'.
He's off again, somewhere looking for something again.... He comes back with his tuneful voice which raises at least 2 octaves on certain words for absolutely no reason at all, then immediately 'withdraws his statement'. Huh, we waited all that time with him shuffling from the Lectern to his seat, under his seat, back to his Lectern to then 'withdraw his statement'. Ok, so we wait for the next riveting statement that comes out of this mouth.
It's funny because Beth Silverman has never had to: withdraw any statement or question. She has never said 'umm or errr' when asking a question or making a statement. She certainly doesn't lose her paperwork, EVER. There are never any silences when she is holding Court. She never laughs in inappropriate times and the list goes on, but let me get back to Amster.
Amster: "The Defendant's guilt must be proved beyond a 'reasonable doubt'. Is this Lonnie Franklin's DNA 'proved beyond a reasonable doubt'?
Is this Lonnie Franklin's DNA?.... 'proved beyond a reasonable doubt'? Is this 'proved beyond a reasonable doubt'? Each of those factors that are necessary to show the Defendant, is the actual killer, must be proved beyond a 'reasonable doubt'.
There are 2 interpretations of the evidence: one that said he didn't do it and one that said he did do it, you have to accept that he didn't do it! THAT'S.... OUR.... LAW"!
WHATTTTTTTTTTT!!!!!!
Amster: "We can change this law tomorrow, we don't have to have it, but we do. So that means the Yes the Government has given us one interpretation. You must find that AAALLLLL the unknown DNA is unreasonable to those individuals to defend the actual killing to find Lonnie Franklin guilty.
The Government wants to see patterns: They want to see over a long period of time that this body was found in an alley and that body was found in the alley....
You know what..... Let me stop here for a moment....
There is one thing that both the Defense and the Government can completely agree on. Every single one of the victims in this case life mattered. There's nothing we will ever say that will persuade to you that their life wasn't important or their life didn't matter. Every single one of them had a right to live. They had a life. It makes no difference why they were on those streets or not, that's not the issue in this case as far as what happened. It makes no difference in this case, so please if I talk about the circumstances that occurred and I talk about the terrible things that happened we are not NOT.. TRYING ... TO...DIMINISH.. THEM... IN... ANY... WAY.. THEIR.. LIFE.. MATTERED! EACH AND EVERY ONE OF THEM.
But the Government wants to see patterns here, over a long period of time. Saying that because 'This body was found in an alley, this body was found".
And this went on and on with his Defense being 'Circumstantial evidence and 'proof beyond a reasonable doubt'. I think we all got it, he made his point very clear. Then he went on with a story.
Amster: "You know theres a story of a rancher that wanted all his neighbours to think that he was a great marksman. He went to his barn and told his neighbours that he was a great marksman. So he fired his gun and he fired several bullets against the barn. there were bullet holes in the barn...."..
This went on and on but I won't go on here.. the rest will be in my book. Yesterday was the 2nd day of Closing Arguments and the miserable Bailiff with the down turned mouth, Tony, threw me out for just holding my cell phone in my hand. Yes it was 8.40am, long before we began and other people who were sitting next to me had their cell phones out too. But this hateful man who clearly hates himself has always hated me the most and had waited for the time he could throw me out. I will continue this Blog today with the events of the final day of Closing Arguments from yesterday, May 3rd. Although this Bailiff tried to affect my writing, he didn't as I didn't miss a word as the lovely Sergeant, Sgt. Westphal, let me sit on a chair outside the door then I went and sat with my friends in the media upstairs to see everything on 4 television screens. These updates will be posted today bye the end of today, May 4th.
No comments:
Post a Comment