As you read and heard in a report yesterday, in the long ruling that judge Zuniga gave on the 1385 hearing, it appeared she was spending a lot of time justifying her rulings in the preliminary hearing.

She gave a long dissertation regarding the witnesses the credibility and the evidence given during 18 months of testimony. She also talked about problems that resulted in the length of the hearing.

She also went into extensive critique of the inability and the problems with the District Attorney’s Office providing discovery in this case. This is not unique to this area, as I am continually hearing from other attorneys about discovery issues for a long time in this county.

Judge Zuniga stated that she has the distinction of being the only judge to release capital case defendants on an OR release, she also noted that was not a distinction she was proud to have.

She went into a long narrative about why that needed to be done, and basically was because new discovery had been brought in by the District Attorney’s Office after everybody had rested their case, one piece of that evidence was an interview of Robert Woody, in fact the first interview of Robert Woody after he was arrested 2014.

She noted that this was a case that the District Attorney’s Office, and I quote, “let get away from themselves because they filed charges to soon.” She also noted “they bumbled their way through discovery.”

She stated that the District Attorney’s Office right-hand did not know what the left hand was doing, as there was constant confusion between investigators from different agencies. She also noted an argument that attorney Hans had made to at the end of the preliminary hearing discussing that the infrastructure at the district attorney’s office was not up to the job to comply with the law.

Judge Zuniga never made mention from the April 10, 2017 ruling, of her telling the District Attorney’s Office that “she saved their case for them.” She never made mention that she was constantly advising the district attorney the proper methods of posing questions and building foundations to questions with the witness.

She noted that all attorneys were responsible in different ways for the length of the hearing but did put a strong share of the responsibility on the District Attorney’s Office in her insistent re-cross examinations as if she could never let it go.

Yesterday, September 26, 2017 is when she ruled against the defense on their motion for her to dismiss the charges.

Another note of importance, Modesto bee reporter, Rosalio Rahumada, was in court for this entire hearing and her ruling, and as of yet no article in the Modesto be regarding this matter.

In the past, I have been in contact with the Modesto bee and questioned their lack of coverage of the case that they declared was the third most important story of 2015. I have been told there has been extensive coverage by the bee on this case. I personally do not feel that is the case.

If anybody wishes to contact the Modesto bee namely Rosalio Rahumada here is his email address.