San Bernardino County Supervisor Paul Biane retained a criminal defense attorney last fall to advise him before he testified in front of a grand jury, the supervisor said Thursday.
Biane's campaign finance documents filed Monday for the period between July 1, 2009 to Dec. 31, 2009 show two payments totaling about $50,000 to the Los Angeles law firm of Corbin, Fitzgerald and Athey. The firm specializes in white-collar criminal defense and business litigation, according to its Web site.
Last August, the district attorney's office served subpoenas to top county officials, including supervisors. Officials were called to appear before a grand jury, starting in September.
"I don't believe anyone should testify in any legal proceeding without seeking the advice of counsel," Biane said in a statement. "So that's what I did. It's as simple as that."
A month before issuing the subpoenas, the district attorney's office announced that it was looking into the county's efforts to develop a 1,200-acre piece of land in Rancho Cucamonga and a $102 million lawsuit settlement in 2006 with Colonies Partners.
Last month, the district attorney's office revealed that it had sought a legal opinion from the Fair Political Practices Commission over a trip that Biane took in September 2008.
According to Biane's campaign finance records, he reimbursed two businessmen associated with Colonies for a flight to Virginia on a private jet and for a golfing trip that same weekend.
The state watchdog agency is being asked to examine whether Biane violated disclosure laws and properly reported the gifts he received.
Source
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Self-help guru in court on manslaughter charges
Self-help guru James Arthur Ray says it was all a tragic accident when his followers began collapsing one by one in a sweat lodge at his retreat, with three of them dying. As unfortunate as the ordeal was, he says the participants knew about the risks the ceremony presented.
Prosecutors say it's a blatant case of manslaughter by a man who recklessly crammed dozens of people in a 400-square-foot sweat lodge and chided them for wanting to leave, even as people were vomiting, getting burned by hot rocks and lying lifeless on the ground.
The two sides will be on display in coming months now that prosecutors have charged Ray with manslaughter in a case that could send him to prison for more than 35 years. The 52-year-old Ray said nothing during his first court appearance Thursday, and his lawyer entered a not guilty plea.
The prospect of a conviction against Ray will depend on whether jurors view the episode as an accident or a criminal act in which he recklessly caused the deaths of the victims, the definition of manslaughter in Arizona.
Despite the shocking details that have emerged from that night in the sweat lodge, legal experts say prosecutors won't have an easy time landing a conviction.
Ray's strongest defense will be that the participants were made aware of the risks the ceremony presented, including extreme temperatures in a small space and the possibility of injury or death, and voluntarily went in, criminal defense attorneys said.
But that won't necessarily put Ray in the clear.
"Even though they assumed risks, that doesn't necessarily take the defendant off the hook," said Roy Black, a Miami defense attorney whose clients have included Rush Limbaugh and William Kennedy Smith. "He has an obligation to people. He's the one leading the program, he has a responsibility to make sure it's run safely."
Source
Prosecutors say it's a blatant case of manslaughter by a man who recklessly crammed dozens of people in a 400-square-foot sweat lodge and chided them for wanting to leave, even as people were vomiting, getting burned by hot rocks and lying lifeless on the ground.
The two sides will be on display in coming months now that prosecutors have charged Ray with manslaughter in a case that could send him to prison for more than 35 years. The 52-year-old Ray said nothing during his first court appearance Thursday, and his lawyer entered a not guilty plea.
The prospect of a conviction against Ray will depend on whether jurors view the episode as an accident or a criminal act in which he recklessly caused the deaths of the victims, the definition of manslaughter in Arizona.
Despite the shocking details that have emerged from that night in the sweat lodge, legal experts say prosecutors won't have an easy time landing a conviction.
Ray's strongest defense will be that the participants were made aware of the risks the ceremony presented, including extreme temperatures in a small space and the possibility of injury or death, and voluntarily went in, criminal defense attorneys said.
But that won't necessarily put Ray in the clear.
"Even though they assumed risks, that doesn't necessarily take the defendant off the hook," said Roy Black, a Miami defense attorney whose clients have included Rush Limbaugh and William Kennedy Smith. "He has an obligation to people. He's the one leading the program, he has a responsibility to make sure it's run safely."
Source
Monday, March 15, 2010
Sweat Lodge Deaths Not Criminal, Guru’s Lawyer Says
LOS ANGELES — A lawyer for the New Age guru who led a sweat lodge ceremony in Arizona that left three people dead said Wednesday that the deaths were a “tragedy” and an “accident,” but should not be considered a crime.In letters last month and last week to prosecutors, the lawyer for the guru, James A. Ray, who led the Oct. 8 ceremony at the Angel Valley Spiritual Retreat Center in Sedona, Ariz., sought to erase perceptions that Mr. Ray had stopped people from leaving and had sat by while people died.
“Mr. Ray and his team relied on Angel Valley to provide a safe environment, warned people of the risks, did not force people to participate, did not prevent them from leaving, and did everything they could to prepare for any problems and to assist when problems arose,” the lawyer, Luis Li, and two colleagues wrote in the Jan. 4 letter.
The letter added, “The idea perpetrated by the media that Mr. Ray was somehow intentionally callous about the victims of this tragedy is profoundly wrong and hurtful.”
The “spiritual warrior” retreat led by Mr. Ray included a two-hour sweat lodge ceremony during which hot rocks were placed inside a tent to produce a sweltering environment intended to cleanse or renew the soul. Of the 55 people inside, 3 died, and 20 others were treated for heat-related injuries.
In an interview, Mr. Li did not make Mr. Ray available, saying the letters were his comment.
“It’s a tragedy, it’s an accident but it is not a crime,” Mr. Li said.
Although Mr. Ray and his team have remained largely silent, the letters from his lawyers — a 22-page one dated Dec. 1 and a six-page document sent Jan. 4 — expressed concern that “recent media stories” had cast Mr. Ray in unfavorable terms at a time when prosecutors were reviewing the case. Mr. Li released the letters to the news media on Wednesday.
Mr. Li said it appeared the Yavapai County attorney was considering a charge of criminally negligent homicide, essentially manslaughter. The attorney, Sheila Polk, through an assistant, declined to comment.
Some ceremony participants have said in police reports and in interviews with reporters that Mr. Ray and his staff members did little to help people in obvious distress during the ceremony.
But Mr. Li said that the witness statements were incomplete or taken out of context and that Mr. Ray had provided the help he could. Mr. Li said that some of the statements had come from witnesses who were planning to seek a monetary settlement from Mr. Ray’s company, James Ray International.
The letters concede that Mr. Ray sought to encourage people through challenging exercises, including a “vision quest” hike in the mountains before the sweat lodge. The participants all signed releases that stated death was a possibility, Mr. Li said.
But Mr. Li cast many of the activities as benign, saying they were like the games and role-playing found in many corporate retreats. The documents assert that Mr. Ray adapted much of his approach from his years as an “internal trainer” with AT&T.
“This was a five-day retreat, not a cult,” Mr. Li said.
The letters said people interviewed by Mr. Ray’s legal team had characterized Mr. Ray as acting something like a coach during the event. One participant recalled him telling people: “Come on you can do it. You are better than this.” Another compared Mr. Ray’s urgings to that of a personal trainer demanding “one more rep,” repetition, during a workout. Drinks were available outside the tent, Mr. Li said.
Source
“Mr. Ray and his team relied on Angel Valley to provide a safe environment, warned people of the risks, did not force people to participate, did not prevent them from leaving, and did everything they could to prepare for any problems and to assist when problems arose,” the lawyer, Luis Li, and two colleagues wrote in the Jan. 4 letter.
The letter added, “The idea perpetrated by the media that Mr. Ray was somehow intentionally callous about the victims of this tragedy is profoundly wrong and hurtful.”
The “spiritual warrior” retreat led by Mr. Ray included a two-hour sweat lodge ceremony during which hot rocks were placed inside a tent to produce a sweltering environment intended to cleanse or renew the soul. Of the 55 people inside, 3 died, and 20 others were treated for heat-related injuries.
In an interview, Mr. Li did not make Mr. Ray available, saying the letters were his comment.
“It’s a tragedy, it’s an accident but it is not a crime,” Mr. Li said.
Although Mr. Ray and his team have remained largely silent, the letters from his lawyers — a 22-page one dated Dec. 1 and a six-page document sent Jan. 4 — expressed concern that “recent media stories” had cast Mr. Ray in unfavorable terms at a time when prosecutors were reviewing the case. Mr. Li released the letters to the news media on Wednesday.
Mr. Li said it appeared the Yavapai County attorney was considering a charge of criminally negligent homicide, essentially manslaughter. The attorney, Sheila Polk, through an assistant, declined to comment.
Some ceremony participants have said in police reports and in interviews with reporters that Mr. Ray and his staff members did little to help people in obvious distress during the ceremony.
But Mr. Li said that the witness statements were incomplete or taken out of context and that Mr. Ray had provided the help he could. Mr. Li said that some of the statements had come from witnesses who were planning to seek a monetary settlement from Mr. Ray’s company, James Ray International.
The letters concede that Mr. Ray sought to encourage people through challenging exercises, including a “vision quest” hike in the mountains before the sweat lodge. The participants all signed releases that stated death was a possibility, Mr. Li said.
But Mr. Li cast many of the activities as benign, saying they were like the games and role-playing found in many corporate retreats. The documents assert that Mr. Ray adapted much of his approach from his years as an “internal trainer” with AT&T.
“This was a five-day retreat, not a cult,” Mr. Li said.
The letters said people interviewed by Mr. Ray’s legal team had characterized Mr. Ray as acting something like a coach during the event. One participant recalled him telling people: “Come on you can do it. You are better than this.” Another compared Mr. Ray’s urgings to that of a personal trainer demanding “one more rep,” repetition, during a workout. Drinks were available outside the tent, Mr. Li said.
Source
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Victim in Roman Polanski rape case expected to take new legal step on his behalf
In the 33 years since she accused Roman Polanski of rape, Samantha Geimer has publicly forgiven the acclaimed director, accused the American justice system of mistreating him and urged a dismissal of his still pending criminal case.
On Friday, Geimer is expected to take yet another step on Polanski’s behalf – asking that a Los Angeles court force U.S. authorities to abandon their ongoing attempt to extradite the filmmaker from Switzerland.
In papers served on Polanski’s lawyers Wednesday and expected to be filed in Superior Court this morning, Geimer’s lawyer contends that the L.A. County district attorney’s office violated the state's victims rights statute by not consulting with her prior to making the extradition request.
Now a married mother living in Hawaii, Geimer was 13 when she told authorities Polanski raped and sodomized her during a photo shoot at Jack Nicholson’s house.
Geimer's attorney, Lawrence Silver, wrote that at a Friday hearing he planned to cite Marsy’s Law – a 2008 statute passed by ballot initiative – that specifically guarantees crime victims a number of rights, including the right “to reasonable notice of and to reasonably confer with the prosecuting agency, upon request, regarding ... the determination whether to extradite the defendant.”
The attorney wrote that in a July letter to the deputy district attorney handling the case, he made clear that Geimer wanted to meet with prosecutors and planned to “exercise every right that she may have under the Victim’s Bill of Rights.”
No one from the district attorney’s office contacted Geimer – whose pro-Polanski feelings were widely known – at that time or in September when the director was arrested in Zurich on a three-decades-old arrest warrant, according to the papers.
Prosecutors later submitted a formal extradition request to Swiss authorities, and the director is being held under house arrest pending a decision by the courts there.
“The failure to give notice to and to confer prior to a determination to extradite the defendant ... is a violation to the California Constitution,” Silver wrote.
A spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office said Wednesday that the office had not yet received Geimer’s filing and could not comment.
Geimer began advocating for Polanski after reaching a settlement to her civil suit against him for sexual assault and other claims. Under the terms of the confidential 1993 agreement, he agreed to pay her at least $500,000.
Judge Peter Espinoza, the supervising judge of the Superior Court’s criminal division, will hear arguments at Friday’s proceeding concerning Polanski’s request to be sentenced in absentia. A state appellate court proposed such a sentencing last month as a way to air the filmmaker’s claims of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct in the original handling of the case without requiring Polanski to return to the U.S.
Prosecutors have opposed the measure, saying it amounts to letting a fugitive dictate court proceedings. In her papers, Geimer said she favored sentencing in absentia.
It was the desire of Geimer’s parents to spare her the ordeal of testifying at a public trial that led to a plea deal regarded then and now as exceptionally favorable to Polanski. He agreed to plead guilty to a single count of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor – a statutory rape charge – and prosecutors said they would drop rape, sodomy, oral copulation and other counts at sentencing.
That proceeding did not happen because Polanski fled to Europe. His lawyers contend he left because the trial judge reneged on an agreement to count the 42 days the director had spent in prison for diagnostic testing as his entire sentence
Source
On Friday, Geimer is expected to take yet another step on Polanski’s behalf – asking that a Los Angeles court force U.S. authorities to abandon their ongoing attempt to extradite the filmmaker from Switzerland.
In papers served on Polanski’s lawyers Wednesday and expected to be filed in Superior Court this morning, Geimer’s lawyer contends that the L.A. County district attorney’s office violated the state's victims rights statute by not consulting with her prior to making the extradition request.
Now a married mother living in Hawaii, Geimer was 13 when she told authorities Polanski raped and sodomized her during a photo shoot at Jack Nicholson’s house.
Geimer's attorney, Lawrence Silver, wrote that at a Friday hearing he planned to cite Marsy’s Law – a 2008 statute passed by ballot initiative – that specifically guarantees crime victims a number of rights, including the right “to reasonable notice of and to reasonably confer with the prosecuting agency, upon request, regarding ... the determination whether to extradite the defendant.”
The attorney wrote that in a July letter to the deputy district attorney handling the case, he made clear that Geimer wanted to meet with prosecutors and planned to “exercise every right that she may have under the Victim’s Bill of Rights.”
No one from the district attorney’s office contacted Geimer – whose pro-Polanski feelings were widely known – at that time or in September when the director was arrested in Zurich on a three-decades-old arrest warrant, according to the papers.
Prosecutors later submitted a formal extradition request to Swiss authorities, and the director is being held under house arrest pending a decision by the courts there.
“The failure to give notice to and to confer prior to a determination to extradite the defendant ... is a violation to the California Constitution,” Silver wrote.
A spokeswoman for the district attorney’s office said Wednesday that the office had not yet received Geimer’s filing and could not comment.
Geimer began advocating for Polanski after reaching a settlement to her civil suit against him for sexual assault and other claims. Under the terms of the confidential 1993 agreement, he agreed to pay her at least $500,000.
Judge Peter Espinoza, the supervising judge of the Superior Court’s criminal division, will hear arguments at Friday’s proceeding concerning Polanski’s request to be sentenced in absentia. A state appellate court proposed such a sentencing last month as a way to air the filmmaker’s claims of judicial and prosecutorial misconduct in the original handling of the case without requiring Polanski to return to the U.S.
Prosecutors have opposed the measure, saying it amounts to letting a fugitive dictate court proceedings. In her papers, Geimer said she favored sentencing in absentia.
It was the desire of Geimer’s parents to spare her the ordeal of testifying at a public trial that led to a plea deal regarded then and now as exceptionally favorable to Polanski. He agreed to plead guilty to a single count of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor – a statutory rape charge – and prosecutors said they would drop rape, sodomy, oral copulation and other counts at sentencing.
That proceeding did not happen because Polanski fled to Europe. His lawyers contend he left because the trial judge reneged on an agreement to count the 42 days the director had spent in prison for diagnostic testing as his entire sentence
Source
Monday, February 15, 2010
Shepard Fairey to face criminal investigation in Associated Press case
A judge in New York revealed today that artist Shepard Fairey is facing a criminal investigation in connection with his admitted misconduct in the ongoing legal case with the Associated Press, according to reports.
Alvin K. Hellerstein, a federal district judge, reportedly made the revelation today as part of a hearing where lawyers for Fairey and the AP were present.
A spokesman for the AP said in a statement issued this evening that the news organization has received a grand jury subpoena related to Fairey's misconduct during the case.
A lawyer representing Fairey did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In October, the L.A. artist admitted that he knowingly submitted false images and deleted others during the case in an attempt to conceal the fact that the AP had correctly identified the photo that Fairey had used as a reference for his "Hope" poster of then-Sen. Barack Obama.
In February, the AP claimed that Fairey violated copyright laws when he used one of its images as the basis for the poster. In response, the artist filed a lawsuit against the AP, claiming that he was protected under fair use.
At the time, Fairey claimed that he used a different photo as the inspiration for his poster. He has since admitted that the AP is correct about which photo he used.
Following today's hearing, the AP published a report stating that the judge revealed the grand jury probe in a handwritten note denying a request by a Fairey attorney that a hearing relating to a copyright lawsuit be closed.
Source
Alvin K. Hellerstein, a federal district judge, reportedly made the revelation today as part of a hearing where lawyers for Fairey and the AP were present.
A spokesman for the AP said in a statement issued this evening that the news organization has received a grand jury subpoena related to Fairey's misconduct during the case.
A lawyer representing Fairey did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In October, the L.A. artist admitted that he knowingly submitted false images and deleted others during the case in an attempt to conceal the fact that the AP had correctly identified the photo that Fairey had used as a reference for his "Hope" poster of then-Sen. Barack Obama.
In February, the AP claimed that Fairey violated copyright laws when he used one of its images as the basis for the poster. In response, the artist filed a lawsuit against the AP, claiming that he was protected under fair use.
At the time, Fairey claimed that he used a different photo as the inspiration for his poster. He has since admitted that the AP is correct about which photo he used.
Following today's hearing, the AP published a report stating that the judge revealed the grand jury probe in a handwritten note denying a request by a Fairey attorney that a hearing relating to a copyright lawsuit be closed.
Source
Monday, December 28, 2009
Oral arguments scheduled in Polanski's CA appeal
LOS ANGELES — A California appeals court will listen to oral arguments from Roman Polanski's attorneys about why it should require a lower court to decide whether to dismiss charges against the fugitive director, whether he is present or not.
Polanski in July appealed a Los Angeles Superior Court judge's decision not to dismiss the criminal case because the director didn't appear for a hearing. The California Second District Court of Appeal on Monday set oral arguments for Dec. 10.
Los Angeles authorities have considered the Oscar-winning director a fugitive since he fled the United States in February 1978 just before he was to be sentenced for unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl.
The appeal was filed before Polanski's arrest in Switzerland on Sept. 25. He has resisted efforts to return him to Los Angeles. Extradition paperwork filed by U.S. authorities states the maximum sentence that Polanski, 76, faces is two years in prison.
Polanski's French attorney has filed a new bail offer with Swiss authorities in an attempt to free the Oscar-winning filmmaker.
Lawyer Herve Temime said the offer Monday includes "adequate guarantees" that Polanski will not flee justice if released. Polanski is awaiting a decision on extradition to the United States.
Switzerland's Justice Ministry rejected a bail offer Friday, considering Polanski a high flight risk. They noted it was not a cash offer.
Temime said Sunday the new offer would include a "very, very significant" cash amount, but he gave no further details Monday.
The California appellate court's decision to schedule oral arguments came 10 days after prosecutors and Polanski's attorneys filed supplemental briefs on why the appeal should either be heard or dismissed.
Prosecutors have consistently argued that Polanski needs to be present for the judge to consider whether to dismiss the case against him. They argued the appeal should be barred by Polanski's status as a fugitive, and that his arrest has rendered the case moot since there is now a chance that he will be returned to the United States.
Polanski's attorneys, however, argued his status as a fugitive shouldn't disqualify his appeal. The Superior Court judge should be required to decide whether to dismiss the case because of a judge's misconduct in handling Polanski's original criminal case, they stated in court filings.
They also contend that because of the previous misconduct, Polanski should not have to attend the hearing.
Polanski's victim, Samantha Geimer, has repeatedly asked for dismissal of the charges against Polanski. Her attorney filed a declaration in the appeals case last month, stating that the case's re-emergence has caused her undisclosed health issues and problems at her workplace.
Source
Polanski in July appealed a Los Angeles Superior Court judge's decision not to dismiss the criminal case because the director didn't appear for a hearing. The California Second District Court of Appeal on Monday set oral arguments for Dec. 10.
Los Angeles authorities have considered the Oscar-winning director a fugitive since he fled the United States in February 1978 just before he was to be sentenced for unlawful sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old girl.
The appeal was filed before Polanski's arrest in Switzerland on Sept. 25. He has resisted efforts to return him to Los Angeles. Extradition paperwork filed by U.S. authorities states the maximum sentence that Polanski, 76, faces is two years in prison.
Polanski's French attorney has filed a new bail offer with Swiss authorities in an attempt to free the Oscar-winning filmmaker.
Lawyer Herve Temime said the offer Monday includes "adequate guarantees" that Polanski will not flee justice if released. Polanski is awaiting a decision on extradition to the United States.
Switzerland's Justice Ministry rejected a bail offer Friday, considering Polanski a high flight risk. They noted it was not a cash offer.
Temime said Sunday the new offer would include a "very, very significant" cash amount, but he gave no further details Monday.
The California appellate court's decision to schedule oral arguments came 10 days after prosecutors and Polanski's attorneys filed supplemental briefs on why the appeal should either be heard or dismissed.
Prosecutors have consistently argued that Polanski needs to be present for the judge to consider whether to dismiss the case against him. They argued the appeal should be barred by Polanski's status as a fugitive, and that his arrest has rendered the case moot since there is now a chance that he will be returned to the United States.
Polanski's attorneys, however, argued his status as a fugitive shouldn't disqualify his appeal. The Superior Court judge should be required to decide whether to dismiss the case because of a judge's misconduct in handling Polanski's original criminal case, they stated in court filings.
They also contend that because of the previous misconduct, Polanski should not have to attend the hearing.
Polanski's victim, Samantha Geimer, has repeatedly asked for dismissal of the charges against Polanski. Her attorney filed a declaration in the appeals case last month, stating that the case's re-emergence has caused her undisclosed health issues and problems at her workplace.
Source
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Authorities release details in case of Pomona man linked to three killings
A Pomona man charged in connection with a September gang killing and linked to two additional killings is expected to be arraigned on murder charges this morning.
Robert Louis Caballero, 32, had been charged Oct. 30 in connection to the Sept. 29 shooting death of Armando Vidana, 25, of Pomona, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.
In the hours after Caballero was arrested Saturday by Pomona police, investigators learned the locations of two additional victims whose killings are believed to be tied to Caballero, said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
"We do believe they're related," Whitmore said.
Authorities identified the two additional victims as El Monte native David Arthur Padilla Jr., 29, whose body was found under a Chino freeway overpass, and 32-year-old Lorraine Minjarez of Covina. Minjarez's body was buried along Mt. Baldy Road in the San Gabriel Mountains.
Multiple police sources declined to specify how authorities learned of the two additional victims.
Vidana was shot multiple times after 3 a.m. Sept. 29 in the 600 block of Illinois Street and later died at a local hospital.
Investigators linked Caballero to the shooting after witnesses told police that prior to Vidana's death, Caballero told people he was going to kill him, Deputy District Attorney Bjorn Dodd said.Caballero and Vidana were members of rival gangs, and Caballero's motive in the killing was related to the gang rivalry, Dodd said.
Three days after the killing, on Oct. 2, police located Caballero and his girlfriend, 20-year-old Jessica Renee Prendiz of Pomona, Dodd said.
Caballero and Prendiz ran from police, and as they fled Prendiz discarded the weapon allegedly used to kill Vidana, Dodd said.
Prendiz was later captured and has been charged with an accessory to murder after the fact. She remains jailed in lieu of $500,000 bail and is next due in Pomona Superior Court on Nov. 24.
At about 1 a.m. Saturday, Pomona police attempted to stop a car for a routine traffic violation in the area of Holt Avenue and Reservoir Street, according to a police news release.
The driver, who was Caballero, led officers on a brief pursuit into Montclair. His silver Dodge Charger crashed into a light pole at Pradera Avenue and Granada Street. He attempted to flee on foot before he was arrested, police said.
Source
Robert Louis Caballero, 32, had been charged Oct. 30 in connection to the Sept. 29 shooting death of Armando Vidana, 25, of Pomona, and a warrant was issued for his arrest.
In the hours after Caballero was arrested Saturday by Pomona police, investigators learned the locations of two additional victims whose killings are believed to be tied to Caballero, said Steve Whitmore, spokesman for the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department.
"We do believe they're related," Whitmore said.
Authorities identified the two additional victims as El Monte native David Arthur Padilla Jr., 29, whose body was found under a Chino freeway overpass, and 32-year-old Lorraine Minjarez of Covina. Minjarez's body was buried along Mt. Baldy Road in the San Gabriel Mountains.
Multiple police sources declined to specify how authorities learned of the two additional victims.
Vidana was shot multiple times after 3 a.m. Sept. 29 in the 600 block of Illinois Street and later died at a local hospital.
Investigators linked Caballero to the shooting after witnesses told police that prior to Vidana's death, Caballero told people he was going to kill him, Deputy District Attorney Bjorn Dodd said.Caballero and Vidana were members of rival gangs, and Caballero's motive in the killing was related to the gang rivalry, Dodd said.
Three days after the killing, on Oct. 2, police located Caballero and his girlfriend, 20-year-old Jessica Renee Prendiz of Pomona, Dodd said.
Caballero and Prendiz ran from police, and as they fled Prendiz discarded the weapon allegedly used to kill Vidana, Dodd said.
Prendiz was later captured and has been charged with an accessory to murder after the fact. She remains jailed in lieu of $500,000 bail and is next due in Pomona Superior Court on Nov. 24.
At about 1 a.m. Saturday, Pomona police attempted to stop a car for a routine traffic violation in the area of Holt Avenue and Reservoir Street, according to a police news release.
The driver, who was Caballero, led officers on a brief pursuit into Montclair. His silver Dodge Charger crashed into a light pole at Pradera Avenue and Granada Street. He attempted to flee on foot before he was arrested, police said.
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)