By Marty Carlson


The afternoon session got started about 1340 hrs. and they revealed that the recusal motion will be finished on November 14 no later than the 15th with the decision made on either day that the argument are finished.

They then moved on to a 1539C motion which is regarding evidence taken in the case. Robert Forkner argued that the evidence must be produced. There discussing the original affidavit that was given to judge Abdallah in San Joaquin County by Deputy Barringer. Judge Abdallah had rejected a warrant and they have been unable to find the original affidavit since.

Marlisa Ferreira stated that the warrant was rejected by judge Abdallah and they did not have the affidavit of what had been requested of judge Abdallah. Judge Zuniga was making some inquiries of the district attorney and kept getting interrupted and got a little upset and told her to stop. Marlisa Ferreira stated that a second affidavit that had been submitted to another judge was extremely similar but unknown for sure if it was the same as what was submitted to judge Abdallah.

Robert Forkner argued the District Attorney’s Office is required by the Penal Code to provide the original affidavit that was denied. And they need the original not a similar document. Judge Zuniga did not agree with Robert Forkner and stated this motion goes along with the 1538.5 motion that is still pending, it may have merit but is premature at this time.

They then noted that tomorrow at 11 AM the attorney for the Atty. Gen.’s office will be back to do the sanctions motion that was requested by the defense.

They then discussed the motion that was apparently filed by the District Attorney’s Office to expand on a search warrant of Frank Carson’s electronics, as a still have some computers in such. Judge Zuniga advised her that is a little too broad and she needs to obtain another search warrant to do so.

Mme. DA argued that she is looking for the same data as on the original search warrant and is the same property just asking in a different way.

Judge Zuniga said no she cannot expand the warrant to just a general type search. The judge also noted that the special master that was appointed to get the electronics checked was given some different orders than what she had given or at least they were not given by her, and she did not look too pleased.

On to another motion it concerned at least partially Robert Woody and his attorneys and they were not served with the papers, and this will be refiled or reheard once everybody gets served. Also noted by Mme. DA she stated the defense has all discovery that is available since Robert Woody has testified. She also stated that Robert Woody has no other interviews since that time.

The next motion was for the defense to receive all of Robert Woody visits with family, namely dates and times, and the district attorney stated that they have all been discovered entered been no other visits since his testimony.

The next motion by the defense was to confirm that all discovery had been received in regard to Carrie Abby being used as an informant in the case. The District Attorney’s Office stated there was no agreements made concerning Carrie Abby or anyone of her family to reduce the charges.

Robert Forkner argued that Miss Abby obviously got a deal when she went from a homicide and other felony charges to a misdemeanor plea bargain. That plea bargain was for possession of steroids. Attorney Forkner stated that some deals had to be made to get that kind of reduction. He also wanted Carrie Abby’s handlers name.

Marlisa Ferreira advised there was no written agreement after the preliminary hearing of Carrie Abby that led to lesser charges.

Robert Forkner argued if that’s true the DA is stating that Carrie Abby was given considerations by getting the lesser charges, he requested to know what the negotiations were and what they involved. Was the agreement to work for the District Attorney’s Office wearing a wire or to take videos of the defendants in this case and what were her considerations for doing such.

Marlisa Ferreira stated that Dave Harris was the actual prosecutor on the case and said that Carrie Abby was not held on the will homicide charge and her preliminary hearing. But there were other felonies that was she was held on. She stated Carrie Abby agreed to wear a wire but again said there was no agreement. She did state that those felony charges she was held to answer on were reduced to one misdemeanor.


Robert Forkner requested a declaration under the penalty of perjury be written by Dave Harris of the conditions of that agreement. The judge stated that is not going to happen. They then moved on to the next motion.

The defense is requesting any search warrant data acquired from Google or by any other electronic means. Apparently, Dale Lingerfelt had noted to pieces of information had been received through Google and I believe Apple and there been no others since then.

The defense is asking for any contacts between the District Attorney’s Office and the public defender’s office by the way of emails or electronic or by any other means, regarding someone in the public defender’s office that had placed a campaign poster for Frank Carson in their office and had been asked to remove it. Marlisa Ferreira stated there is no such communications that existed, and even if there were there emails are only for three months and then purged. She also stated that in the motion they requested any videos that had been taken of the audience for outside the courtroom during the preliminary hearing, Marlisa Ferreira again stated that none existed.

Robert Forkner was inquiring if there had been emails at any time that existed that may have been printed out and such and then destroyed. Again Mme. DA stated that no one was asked to remove any campaign posters or discipline for an attitude problem that she was aware of. She did say that somebody from the county had made a complaint about the poster, and Robert Forkner again asked how did she know that? Mme. DA stated that after this motion had been filed she’s talk to the public defender’s office.

The next motion was the defense was requesting any other surveillance that was taken during the campaign for district attorney by Frank Carson. Also, any further information on tracking devices put on vehicles, recordings on disk, any other interviews, police reports. Also, there was a request for any officer incidents personally with any of the law enforcement agencies involved in the investigation. And all photos that may still exist.

Mme. district attorney says there’s no other information it has all been discovered.

The next motion was regarding all evidence concerning search warrants and wiretaps. Robert Forkner stated that there was some real-time information in regard to Frank Carson locations through tracking and wiretaps. He also noted that any information on surveillance, which apparently there was a large amount of, be turned over even if they followed him and nothing happened could be exculpatory.

Marlisa Ferreira stated that all surveillance on Frank Carson had been done through trackers and not personal observation of officers. After a lengthy argument between all parties involved the judge finally advises Marlisa Ferreira to go to her investigators and get reports on all the surveillances that may have done in this case even if nothing had happened on that particular day.

The next motion was discovery of the Woody family receiving any type of gifts, by the way of property and or cash.

The district attorney stated that the warrant is too broad and she does not how to respond.

Robert Forkner argued that they had recordings of phone calls from Robert Woody at the jail to his family, where they had discussing gifts like cars and TVs have been given to them through the District Attorney’s Office. Beverly Woody had made some comments about gifts.

Immediately the judge stated, as she was rolling her eyes, it doesn’t matter what Beverly Woody has to say there is no credibility there.

Mme. DA stated no one in law enforcement that she is aware of is helped Beverly Woody especially in the District Attorney’s Office.

The next motion was information on the dogs he used in the search warrants, the defense has been trying to get records of training and background of the cadaver dogs used in the searches and have not been able to do so.

Mme. DA stated that the defense needs to subpoena the records of the dogs through the outside agencies that were used, and she noted that the dogs were used on lander Avenue, which is Mike Cooley’s house, ninth Street, and other Frank Carson properties. The dogs were not used on East Avenue on pop and cork property. Now that’s not my memory of what happened in preliminary hearing.

So, subpoenas will have to be sent to the agency’s been providing the dogs, but they have not been successful in the past getting information.

The next motion was to get all the results of the analysis done at POP N CORK, in regard to soil, fibers, DNA, or any other sample results. Mme. DA stated they have all been discovered and there are no other records available or test done.

The next motion was a request by the defense for the prosecution to reveal the amount of money that’s been paid to Jim Cook, and Mme. DA advised that Jim Cook has been paid $350,129. It was not made clear if that was just for court testimony or the total amount of money he’s been paid overall in this case.

The defense is requesting any background or past history of Kirk Bunch, and the judge advised him that he pitches motion as to be filed in fact there is a date scheduled to hear it but that motion needs to be filed soon.

The next motion the defense requested reports on records of any recordings or interviews in any way shape or form with Board of Supervisors Terry Withrow, that was done by any investigator. Mme. DA stated there was to recordings turned over on one disc.

The defense also requested that any communications between Terry Withrow and Birgit Fladagar be turned over but the district attorney is arguing that they are privilege communications and again there only kept for three months and are purged.

The defense also requested any reports of Mrs. Geisler who used to work in the District Attorney’s Office and was married to someone in CHP command. Mme. DA stated that Ms. Geisler was not ever fired she just transferred to another position with the county and it had nothing to do with her husband’s involvement in this case.

The next motion was defense requesting any reports written by investigators regarding any of the CHP officers or command staff Mme. DA stated that all discovery and been turned over and gave the bait stamps of their location. The judge also noted that now Lieut. Domby had asserted privilege on the stand during the Quintanar prelim, and would not answer any questions as to personnel file information so she did not feel there is any information.

The defense also made a request for any correspondence between the investigators and the CHP in any way shape or form, the judge advising that motions a little too broad and vague and needs to be rewritten.

The defense also requested any records or logs of visits to Robert Woody by Steve Jacobson since he was taken into custody, and Mme. DA provided bait stamps where that information is located.

At this time the judge was trying to expedite the remaining motions, and just use their drafts and responses, at this time the district attorney requested that they all be read and handled on the record.

At this time Marlisa Ferreira started one of her long-winded rants, and she admitted she needed to vent, arguing the defense is using the District Attorney’s Office to do their homework and telling them where the discovery She stated that the defense is making improper discovery motions.

The defense also made a discovery motion of any other records and information of probation and parole agents taken sometimes the action or activity involving people of interest in this case. Mme. DA advised she needs to talk to Cory Brown to see if there’s any information available as she didn’t have it in front of her.

Defense also made a request of information on jail calls to and from Robert Woody, at both Tuolumne and Stanislaus County. Mme. DA advised that the defense have been provided the key to accessing those records. Robert Forkner advised the key does not work. After a long discussion with the judge they determined that somebody from the defense needs to go to the DAs office and talk to a technical person to show them exactly how it works, it can be difficult.

Defense is also made a motion to request any jail visit logs for Robert Woody, at both Tuolumne and Stanislaus County and Mme. DA stated that has been discovered. Robert Forkner advised there is no Tuolumne County jail logs, but the District Attorney’s Office said they would be provided.

Also of note almost every response that Mme. DA and given to the defense in these request Robert Forkner would either asked how did she know that, they think they have more information, or would confirm that there is no more information available on that particular subject.

Obviously, they were trying to tie up District Attorney’s Office in specific answers instead of some of the comments made by Mme. DA in the past that were started with “I believe.”

Continued until 11:00am tomorrow.