Daniel Wozniak has been found guilty.
In a recent letter to me he wrote
The jury found the defendant guilty of two counts of 187. First degree murder. Sam Herr (on 5-21-10) and Julie Kibuishi (on 5 – 22-10). Special Circumstances were elected for both victims: A) Murder for financial gain. B) Multiple murder. There is also an enhancement: Personal discharge of a firearm.
I want to start by saying that I understand why this jury found Daniel Wozniak guilty. It didn’t take very long either: about two hours. In their seats, going on just the information put forth in court, they really had no option.
Matt Murphy used the term “clinical” when describing the purpose of the guilt phase. He told the jury that this was the time to put aside emotions. They shouldn’t wonder about motive. They don’t need to consider if any other people were involved. This is when you just decide the black and white part of the case. Did Daniel Wozniak participate in the murders of two people? Guilty.
Was I in any way surprised by this verdict? Nope.
Daniel wasn’t, either.
He has never tried to convince me that he’s a completely innocent man who is serving unfair time. Nor would I be foolish enough to believe him if he did.
However, the “if you blinked, you missed it” trial I sat though left me thoroughly disappointed.
First of all, it was nothing like on TV. I will be the first to admit I don’t know the law well enough to figure out why or why not certain questions were asked (or not asked). Maybe TV lawyers are breaking real laws all the time by bringing in certain evidence or asking specific questions.
But since the real lawyers left me wondering about so many details, I figure I can’t be the only one who is curious.
So, I’ve decided to play TV Lawyer for this post. From here on, I’ll be referred to as MMTVL (Murderer Musings TV Lawyer).
Let’s start with the first witness.
If you don’t already know this, the prosecution gets to make its case first. All the prosecution witnesses are put forth before the defense even starts its arguments (unless the defense has made an opening argument, which did not happen in this case).
Each prosecution witness was questioned by Matt Murphy. After that, Scott Sanders was given the opportunity to cross examine that witness. Then, the prosecution gets to re-cross, and the defense can then do a final re-re-cross.
I have no idea how long this back and forth is allowed to go on. But in Daniel’s case, it really doesn’t matter, because the defense rarely questioned the witnesses.
Yes. You read that right.
The Witnesses
1) The first witness was Steve Herr. He is victim Sam Herr’s father, and was the one to find Julie Kibuishi’s body in Sam’s apartment. He, of course, had called the police immediately. He’d been positive that his son had not killed Julie. Mr. Herr was not on the stand long.
No cross examination.
MMTVL wondered why the jury wasn’t told that Mr. Herr visited Daniel in jail. I don’t blame him for wanting to talk to Daniel. I would just like to know what they discussed. Does Mr. Herr think the prosecution has the correct story?
2) Costa Mesa Police detective Stephanie Selkinske was next. She mostly just gave facts about when she had been called to Sam’s apartment after the body of a young woman was found there. She gave the address of the Camden apartments. She referred to photographs of the crime scene (the majority were not shown on the big screen; the jury members were each given printed photos to examine). Selkinske also pointed out that Julie had been wearing a tiara, which her brother had given her earlier, at dinner.
No cross examination.
MMTVL couldn’t think of any questions either.
3) The next witness was another member of the CMPD, Shawna Murry. She’s a crime scene specialist. During her testimony, we found out that there was an open pregnancy test found in Sam’s bathroom. Murry also discussed a piece of paper with a peculiar sketch that was found in the apartment. She said it appeared to be a drawing of an Asian woman lying on a bed. Flames had been drawn around the head of the woman and the words, “I’m done,” were written on the picture.
No cross examination.
Your Honor, I object. MMTVL wants to know more. Were any fingerprints or DNA found on the pregnancy test or the drawing? The pregnancy test was open, but had it been used? If so, what were the results?
4) Ruben Manacho Salas, a close friend of Sam’s, was next. He talked about how he’d met Sam in a speech class at Orange Coast College. The two of them bonded because both were military veterans. Salas testified that Julie and Sam were only friends, even though it wasn’t unusual for Julie to spend the night in Sam’s apartment. He was one of the many people to say they were like brother and sister. Salas also talked of calling Sam’s cell phone on the day he went missing. The person who answered called him “bro” and was too busy to talk at that time. Salas stated that Sam never referred to him as “bro,” so he was suspicious that he had even talked to Sam.
No cross examination.
MMTVL would waive questioning the witness at this time, while retaining the right to call him back at a later time.
At this point, one of the previous witnesses (one of the CMPD – sorry I can’t remember which one) was recalled to the stand. This was to establish that Julie had a Taylor Swift song as her ringtone on her cellphone.
No cross examination.
MMTVL – Uh, why did that just happen?
5) John Randolph. He also lived in the Camden Apartments and was an OCC student. He talked about the big social scene at the apartment complex. He was friendly with all the parties involved, as the apartment complex had a general party atmosphere because so many students lived there. He was even supposed to officiate Daniel and Rachel’s wedding for free. Randolph was asked about Sam’s possible drug use. He wasn’t aware of any.
Randolph was the first witness to be cross examined by Scott Sanders. I wish I had court transcripts in my hot little hands, because I wrote one note: “Only asked a couple of questions.” I must not have thought anything noteworthy was brought up.
MMTVL would have asked a bunch of questions about Daniel and Rachel’s relationship. Did they fight at all? Did he think they were a good match? And so on.
6) Christopher Williams. He was the last witness of the day. There is no way I can give a one or two paragraph summary of his testimony. It was, by far, the most interesting and action-packed of the day. I could probably dedicate an entire book chapter to him.
Christopher Williams’ Testimony
- Met Daniel and Rachel through one of the actresses in “Nine.”
- Loaned them money.
- Told them he got the money from a loan shark (not true).
- Was with Rachel in her apartment when Sam was supposedly murdered. He described her odd behavior, peculiar computer searches, and her negative comments about Daniel.
- He may have briefly met Sam and could be the last person to see him with Daniel.
- Saw Daniel and Rachel in the play on the night of Sam’s murder. He was asked a lot of questions about how Daniel and Rachel were acting that night, on and off stage. Words like “agitated” and “emotional” were used to describe them both.
Overall, Chris Williams’ time on the witness stand brought forth some of the most emotional and intriguing testimony of the trial.
MMTVL thought the defense asked good questions without pushing too hard on Williams, who was very distraught on the stand.
The End of Day One
At the end of day one, I’m pretty sure that most people in the the courtroom thought it was a very successful day for the prosecution. That’s how I saw it.
When I talked to Daniel on the phone that night, he was surprisingly good tempered. He seemed pleased about some of the information that came forth during the testimony that day.
Maybe if I knew the whole true story, I could see what he was seeing.
Coming soon: Daniel Wozniak Guilty – Part Two. The continuation of the Prosecution’s witnesses.