Rochester, N.Y., resident Herbert Smith wasn’t aware of the controversy he was about to create when he was moved to post a photo of a local bar’s dress code to his Facebook page. But since he took to social media to share the long list of items that can’t be worn inside the Murphy’s Law Irish Pub in his neighborhood, some people are calling out the bar for enforcing a “racist” dress code.
Nearly 200 comments later, Smith now realizes he wasn’t alone in his feelings about the restrictions against items such as straight-brim caps, hoodies, bandanas, white tees, and Timberland work boots. Multiple commenters said the list was a clear example of “prejudice.”
“Code for no black people,” one person wrote. “Racist. Hands-down,” said another.
Here’s the dress code in question. Ready your safe space:
Notice how the garments on the list are far from “black only” attire. White tees and hoodies are in every male and female’s closet in ‘Murica. Camo, sleeveless shirts, and ball caps are style staples of every honky south of the Mason-Dixon Line.
Allow me to head the mob off at the pass. There’s no racism to be found here. The bar is just trying to uphold their reputation as a choice establishment. So, they don’t want their patrons dressing like slobs. There are worse things. Have you seen Walmart after 6 pm? Or at any time at all? If only eye-rape were a punishable offense.
No, “slob” is not a dog whistle for “black.” It doesn’t matter if you’re the darkest shade of black or whiter than Conan O’Brien in February. Dressing slovenly transcends skin color. Sweatpants are equal opportunity ugly. If the code is stopping you from entering their place of business, perhaps an upgrade to your wardrobe is in order. Class it up a little. While you’re at it, pick up an iron and an ironing board. Maybe just one shirt without your favorite band emblazoned on the front. No need to get too crazy, just try to fall somewhere between Beavis’ Butthead and James Bond.
We’re all free to criticize a business, sure. Though, in this case, the mob is blowing a simple dress code out of proportion. As usual, squealing racism where there is none. There are two simple solutions when confronted with a dress code such as this. Get an outfit befitting of somebody older than 13, or get your drink on at an alternative establishment. Fair enough?
As I was going into the courthouse this morning, I noticed some of the jurors were leaving out the front door and one of them mentioned that the there is a juror that is sick, and they were told to go home.
We finally got into court around 9:30 and the judge noted there was another note for juror that she needs an oral surgery on October eighth, a week from this Monday. She also noted that November 7-11, she has reservations at a Napa film Festival and wants to know which dates she will be able to attend, as it is apparently her daughter is involved in this Festival.
Percy Martinez noted that also on October 12, he has a court appearance in Tuolumne County in the appearance in the Bay Area at 1:30 that same afternoon. He is requesting a day off. Judge Zuniga noted that she understood the concerns that the DA has and Marlissa Ferreira immediately jumped in again and said an attorney to schedule an event on such short notice. In this type of thing is not appropriate and it should be denied. Judge Zuniga looked at her and bluntly said will be off on the 12th. Judge Zuniga also noted that Marlissa Ferreira had quoted some sites in the Penal Code yesterday that need to be researched for today and she said she had a few choice words for last night as she could not find sections that Marlissa was quoting Mme. DA then noted that she was not looking at the Penal Code, but in fact, the evidence code and admitted she had misstated. The DA also noted that she did look and cannot find relevant citations that she was claiming they had a bunch of pictures that they needed to be gone through that were taken and there was some confusion about this during the search warrants. Marlissa Ferreira did initially, saying that these pictures were from the search warrants on the 2014, March 3, 2014. Attorney Hans was saying that he knows at least some of these were pictures from 2012 and needed to be clarified and there was a lot of ongoing things about that. Then they started going through some of these pictures. There was a picture of shotgun shells before boxes of shotgun shells. There is a safe in the back one of the back offices and that she said that that safe should be, and the judge immediately said that’s not allowed to mean any competent business like this is going to have a safe at the back of a business. There was no relevance whatever, it’s just a picture of safe. There wasn’t a picture of anything in the safe. It’s just a picture of the safe. There were some 32 caliber 50 rounds of 32 caliber bullets through some and she said that relates because there was a 40 caliber underneath the counter, at the counter, up at the register and I don’t know how one relates to the other. But that’s what she said and so they start going in the conversation again about when these pictures were taken.
There was a lot of confusion in the dates and when that search warrant was done so Judge Zuniga wasn’t sure, Marlissa wasn’t sure. Attorney Hans was sure that some of the pictures were at least 2012, so we took another quick break for her to go through them and figured out apparently.
When we came back in, apparently, they were from the 2012 search warrant so there’s some other pictures from 2014 that need to be gone through. Also, so Judge Zuniga also advised that Marlissa Ferreira; she wants hard copies of these pictures. She did not have those for the judge and to tell you the truth, I don’t know why, but she had them when she put them up on the overhead and had a many off of her computer. So, the judge was saying she needed to look at these pictures on hardcopies and the DA’s going to provide those to the judge by a like 1:00 or 1:30 this afternoon before she goes home, so she can look at those pictures over the weekend.
Attorney Hans noted to the judge that some of these pictures were not objected to, some of these pictures will be disputed. The defenses Atty’s provided a list of the DAs’ were the ones that they were disputing but now there’s been little more clarification when they were taken because Hans was saying that these are pictures of bullets from 2014, it’s not relevant to a 2012 event. Judge Zuniga noted to the DA that some of these pictures may be relevant. The massive gun pictures and bullets and things along that lines he said, is prejudicial. They are not charged, with any gun crimes and this comes into 1101, which remember is a prior bad acts. Evidence had already been determined.
Judge Zuniga noted that and, I was surprised that she’d say something like this, but I guess I shouldn’t be. She admits that she has a short-term memory, that is, not very good short-term, but has a good long-term memory. So, she said, she told her something, she would remember it a year from now, but will not remember tomorrow. That’s with the judge said.
Jai Gohel argued that the photos were all evidential issues said, he needed to review all these photos and the district attorney said that she would provide all the photos for all that that they have of the left to be determined to the attorneys today.
Percy Martinez requested, and he has made a motion to have all of Korey Kauffman’s case, or the minute orders from Korey Kauffman’s cases provided to this motion had been filed. He said he filed it about a month ago. I will try to get the motion for minute orders that showed that Frank Carson never represented Korey Kauffman at any time, even on a one-time basis. Marlissa Ferreira did said that she was willing to stipulate that Frank Carson never represented Korey Kauffman, but Percy Martinez still looking for some more information because they could still come back and say later that he may have done a one-day type, a stand-in for another attorney or something along that lines. So, Percy Martinez needed to discuss the situation with Frank Carson and this will be determined on next Tuesday.
That was it. We were done. I did try to go get the DAs response to the misconduct motion. The line at the clerk’s office was out the door so I will just get it Monday or Tuesday. We do not go back to court until Tuesday morning at 9 AM and I will go ahead and cancel the podcast tonight.
To listen by calling in on your phone dial 818-572-2938 and hit #1 on your dialer To comment or ask a question
It seems Blog Talk Radio works better if you call in on the number to listen than listening online.
Good evening everybody this Marty from Dawgs Blog. This is the podcast tonight on September 27, 2018 of the Frank Carson et al. Trial. As you know Ken Beringer still on the stand. He’s a Deputy from Stanislaus County. He’s the original Deputy from Stanislaus County that was assigned to this case. Now other deputies took the missing person case report. A CSO (community service officer) followed up on it. Also found out today that Deputy Jason Garner had done taken the original report and as you all know Jim W Garner was tragically killed on duty in a car crash over Crows Landing Road sometime back. It’s kind of sad, but to he does have an attachment to this case.
Also, the noon time report is up. The noontime transcription report is up. Tom’s report is up. So you probably had a chance to listen to noontime reports. Basically, they’re doing defense cross on Berringer and some the some of things going and the involvement with the DA’s office early on. Jai Gohel was going into cross and we started the afternoon session pretty much on time again today. We do have issues that keep coming up that send the jury out the room, but sometimes it is what it is.
Jai Gohel was doing cross on the Ken Berringer and he was talking about when he was on the case in May 2012. the MAIT group, they won’t call the task force, they refused to call the task force, course Christiansen did in the press conference, other people have even more Bridget Fladager in a declaration use the term task force early on. But they want to call it the multi-agency investigative team, the MAIT team, that’s what they want to call it. They ran into problems especially with AJ Pontillo case, they used the task force over there and they used gang officers for a case it was not gang related. So, they are very careful about what they say.
So, he said in May 2012 he went to the District Attorney’s Office for daily briefings and that was a May 2012 remember. The initial report that he was given that he started on this actually was on 4-10-2012 and that’s when he did the Mike Cooley interview. It was done on the sheriff’s office report forms, but not too long after that everything they did with the reports and the paperwork they filled out, the documentation they did was on the District Attorney’s report paperwork, with the DAs letterhead on it.
Mike Cooley did not mention the people on the back property. Remember when I say back property that always means the Frank Carson property. There is a lot of conversation going on with Mike Cooley and Eula Keyes and Linda Sue Burns and Ricky Cooley in a lot of these other guys. They talk about the back property, that is Frank Carson’s property on the other side of the Mike Cooley’s house. Berringer said that Mike Cooley never mentioned anybody people back there on the back property or people with guns at that time. Mike Cooley never told him he was stealing property from Frank Carson, but he did complain that somebody was accusing him of thefts and he was tired of it. Defense attorneys got Berringer to talk about when Kevin Pickett on May 18, 2012 interview (that’s with Frank Navarro and Jon Evers) with Kevin Pickett, it was a Sheriff’s office contact. Kevin Pickett said the last day he saw Korey Kauffman alive was on 3-29-2012. that’s the day he’s saying that he disappeared. Frank Navarro was doing the interview on that on that date and Kevin Pickett was telling them there were some undercover officers that stopped Kevin Pickett and Korey Kauffman in Kevin Pickett’s pickup truck. The officers were also in an undercover pickup truck at the Mulberry mobile home park in Turlock. He told them they got stopped. Korey had hidden the drugs in the truck and when they saw that there were some officers there. Kevin Pickett never said Berringer finally admitted it, that Pickett never said it was March 30, 2012 during that interview.
Going back to redirect with the district attorney Marlisa Ferreira and Ken Berringer on the first interview with Kevin Pickett he said it was March 30, 2012. I put some abbreviations here and I just confused myself, but Ken Berringer has a memory problem. He doesn’t have good recall. I shouldn’t say a memory problem, but he doesn’t have good recall. He has to keep referring to his notes and the reports. He never recorded Mike Cooley in that interview on April 10. he said that Michael Cooley did not mention that he had contacted Detective Shaw. I think it was with Turlock PD at that time and, we found out their earlier testimony Detective Shaw when he got that call from Cooley, they called Shaw personally not through the dispatch. Shaw had called Kirk Bunch from Mike Cooley’s property and that was on April 1, 2012. Kirk Bunch was on the case April 2, 2012. we also talked about Pickett had talked with Bunch. Cooley had talked to Bunch, but again he couldn’t remember the specifics. Berringer said that he also would have noted another officer if he was mentioned by Cooley during the interview. So, if he had told him that he had talked to Kirk Bunch or Dave Shaw or anybody else, he would write it down. He said that is definitely noteworthy in a report. She asked him if he and actually gone and inspected the fence in the back and he said no, I didn’t. I just about 10-15 feet into the yard by the house and it’s a big lot and he didn’t notice any fence any holes in the back of the fence, but he didn’t go look either. Christine DeFilippo, he said, never mentioned the hole in the fence. He did look up through the Sheriff’s office computers and database any context of Frank Carson on Lander properties. He did not recall that he testified that he did make some searches of the Frank Carson property in the preliminary. I remember him talking about he did do a least a cursory search of the property because he indicated that he saw all the signs of break-ins and door jams broken, locks broken, all kinds of things like that and he never did a report on the burglaries. He saw all these indicators of felonies and he didn’t review. I remember thinking that at the time. So, he did see that the all the contacts of Frank Carson had with Cooley and the times a law enforcement were called over on Lander. He also checked with Mike Cooley as being RP Frank Carson being the (RP is reporting party) Eula Keyes but he never talked to Eula Keyes and he never interviewed Eula Keyes and he never talked to Noel Vento. Now Noel Vento was one of the officers or officers responded during those disturbances over the Cooley house and he never went and talked to Noel Vento even though he looked up there’d been some Sheriff’s office and interaction there. He said he did that after the Mike Cooley interview not prior. He was also asked if he talked to Turlock Police Department officer Maca, (something like that I didn’t really catch the name and I’m terrible about spelling) no he didn’t talk to that officer. There’s another officer by the name of Magana and no he didn’t talk to that person. He didn’t talk to the Dixons, they’re the ones that are claiming the Frank Carson went over there (they work of the leather shop next to the Lander property) and they claim Frank Carson went over and threatened because she was stealing from them. He never talked to them. He reviewed Frank Carson and Mike Cooley activities, all searches done after the Mike Cooley interview. He did review all that because Mike Cooley’s house was searched by Noel Vento on a parole search. He is also asked if he is a DRE. I know you don’t know what DRE is, it a drug recognition expert and he’s trained to spot drug symptoms of under the influence of drugs. If they have a suspicion, like suspicion truck driving or anything else and they call an expert in to do some testing on people. He was asked about Mike Cooley talking about Korey Kauffman in a personal way. He said he was he was his best friend, he was like a son, to he was like a son to him. He said the Mike Cooley demeanor never changed. Remember he was excited he was kind of hyper, I forget the exact terms, but I took it he was pretty jacked up the whole time he was there with Mike Cooley. but I don’t think he was there very long. He said he would’ve noted if he thought he was under the influence, which is 11550 under the influence. As its stands today, he does not feel that he was under the influence on April 10, 2012. he said he never asked about any relationship between Frank Carson and Mike Cooley. Again, he didn’t do any research prior to go out talking to them just after.
On the 7-12-2012 interview he was asked if he asked Frank Carson if he saw Korey Kauffman on 3-30-2012. he said he did not recall if he asked him that on that date. On 8-9-2012, the infamous office visit, he did not ask on that date either. remember that’s the date he dropped off the questions, because Frank Carson told him to put the questions in writing. She asked him what did Frank Carson say? objections lit up the room. There was a sidebar, little bit of a lengthy sidebar. Then she went to another line of questioning when they came back from the sidebar, so whatever she was asking was inappropriate. He was asked if there were any Frank Carson contacts in regard to Korey Kauffman. Frank Carson never said he had seen, knew Korey Kauffman and he never saw that he said Mike Cooley either. These questions were never asked. Frank Carson never told him that he searched Mike Cooley’s property or cars. Marlisa Ferreira is trying to make it look like the Frank Carson did something wrong because he didn’t tell him this stuff. He did talk to Mrs. Gonzales a CSO that did some work on follow-up of the missing person report and he received information of the report by another officer. I believe that officer is when they were talking about that was Jason Garner, I think he took the original report on the missing person report and as I said earlier Jason Garner is now deceased, he’s the one that died in a tragic car crash over Crows Landing Road along with the CSO.
Marlisa Ferreira entered some police reports into evidence. They were reports of their what they’re called computer aided dispatch. Whenever a call comes in the dispatchers write down and type in information. if an officer does something out in the street the dispatcher’s type in that information. if there sent to a Call they typed out that information. It is all the information there and whatever activities the officers do and what time they did it. The evidence numbers were 425, 426, and 427.
There was some objection about some of this information and they went through this not too long ago, because documents are not allowed in court they have to have, even if you have an officer testimony is what’s allowed in court, not a document even if its an official document because of the lack of surety of its authenticity. Some of the these things are done by non-sworn personnel and it is just a long list of issues that are involved in it. And one of those is a CLETS printout, California law enforcement telecommunications system and that’s what they put information into its attach to the FBI system, NCIS and NCIC and the statewide unit. the missing person report that was on CLETS, it’s just kind of a database where everybody can go to one place to look for something specific. The defense objected to all these reports because they are hearsay, some of them are several layers of hearsay, the missing person report was the two or three layers of hearsay. They also have an issue authenticating the police report again because of Jason Garner. She went into a little bit when Kevin Pickett said that he last saw Korey Kauffman again he’s now he saying it was 3/30/2012, apparently there saying that’s what he said in the original report but changed it in the next report. Again, she said he was consistent in the original report but changed it the next interviews. Objection because of being its hearsay of what somebody else was told. he said Kevin Pickett information was used to weed out information. Again objection. Marlisa Ferreira is going through a line of questioning and I have a note on the side here that this whole section every question has multiple sustained objections. She didn’t know how to get the question out. the judge and kept telling her you need to rephrase, it you need to rephrase it and she didn’t know how to get the question out on that interview because he actually didn’t do the report, but he was there on some of those interviews.
Kevin Pickett said again he said it was 3-30-2012. he says I believe again it’s objection, you can’t say I believe because it is speculation. So, he did say that he started he was using 3-30-2012 as missing person date. Marlisa Ferreira was showing Ken Berringer one of the flyers, but not the one that he used. It was a different one, he says he used number 423 and they went back to that one. She didn’t want to use that one because that’s the one with all the information with in regard to Rodolfo Gonzalez and the threats that were allegedly made and some of those things and some of that’s gotta be redacted before jury can look at it. also noted to the Marlisa Ferreira is getting aggravated and she’s kind of a bouncing in her seat. This is the term I use, you can tell when she’s getting aggravated. she was in a rut right there she did know how to get the question out. All so these objections kept coming and kept coming. There still the next page I have, and they are still coming. She asked him if he recalled the questions by the defense regard to that flyer and the information entailed in it. There was a March 29, 2012 date that was put on the flyer, but he says that’s not the date that he put out flyer out, that’s the date that Kevin Pickett and made it apparently. When he talked to Mike Cooley had been two weeks that Korey Kauffman and not been at his house and he was unaware what Kevin Pickett was saying at the time, even though Kevin Pickett had come over and talked to him. Kevin Pickett said was unusual for Korey Kauffman and not being contact and also Mike Cooley was saying that it was not unusual for Korey Kauffman to not be seen that for a while.
He talked about Baljit Atwal ever call back after he left him his number after he talked to him he said no. She asked him about if Baljit Atwal ever said anything about a fight at the store? The jury was sent out the room. Here we go again. They’re talking about Scott Rollins testimony that he saw a video where Korey Kauffman was and Daljit Atwal in the fight out the parking lot, it started in the store and spilled out into the front of the parking lot. Jai Gohel argued there’s no good faith basis to ask the question. She has report and only asked if he saw Korey Kauffman nothing else. The report doesn’t mention anything about a fight he was not asked anything about a fight according to the report. Jai Gohel said it’s an attempt to get other information that she’s not allowed to get into, 1101 is prior bad acts, she is trying to get that in because it wasn’t allowed previously. She even mentioned that during opening arguments and that led to a shit storm first day. The DA says Scott Rollins had testified to the altercation and the threats were heard by John Paden, Kim Stout and Michael Maunakea. That’s not exactly what I heard but yeah, it’s kind of accurate. The defense said that they were polite and so they have put the defense said that Baljit and Daljit Atwal were polite to the officers when they came to do the interview so they’re saying they put their character into question. They put it out there so there allowed to use now. Remember if you have a defendant that takes a stand for example just an example and he says oh I wouldn’t do that I’m a nice guy, he puts his character out there and up to be questioned. If he’s got a long history of nefarious behavior that could be used against him and so on so the defendant statement plus a not guilty pleas, she said, puts their character at open for examination.
Jai Gohel argued the people are the ones who said the events occurred, if you were to believe their story. What he is saying is the people put these all these witnesses on the stand and you’ve got to determine if you believe their stories. Maunakea and Cooley and the Scott Rollins and all these people and that that it been testified in this case. He said it’s another attempt to re-enter some stuff that’s not been allowed. the judge told her she’s not allowed to do it. He said this is also some argument that can be made during closings but not is not evidence.
Attorney Hans argued that bet of Daljit Atwal was never asked about a fight and the DA is doing argument. He is saying the same thing with this witness it’s an argument type of thing that you argue to a jury during closing argument, it is not evidence because there’s nothing there is been asked by the officer in are talked to about by the the Atwals during any interviews. So, the DA is saying they’re lying when they say they don’t know Korey Kauffman and that’s what it all comes down to. She’s trying to say they do know Korey Kauffman and there lying because it had a fight with him.
Percy Martinez says this is all argumentative again and it is a mountain of lies and is nothing but argumentative, so he submitted.
The DA, and I’m watching her bounce in her seat some more, she said the credibility of witnesses goes to the jury, so the jury decides if these witnesses are credible or not. She says the defense put the defendant’s character in the play she has a right to attack any good character claims that they make that’s put up by the defense. what she is saying is their good character is that the Atwals were cooperative, they were polite, they offered him some water. She is saying that the defense is making at a good character claim when they said that. I don’t know the law, I don’t know if it is or not that’s up to Her Highness to decide. Again, Marlisa gets rolling on this stuff, it is really repetitive, she thinks sheer volume she’s going to win her argument and with this judge sometimes it works. what the defense has done is put the character at issue and the judge said no it doesn’t. Judge Zuniga says it’s up it’s up to jury decide if these witnesses are credible and the key in character of whatever information is available. She says once a door on character opens up it was open for all. So, she would be warning her that could go a lot of different directions like towards officers too.
Jai Gohel want to make his record and said with the all the thrust of the questioning it suggests they weren’t cooperating, and it is misleading. Marlisa Ferreira was trying to make it sound like they weren’t cooperating because they weren’t volunteering information, but they were cooperative they didn’t tell him to leave they store, they didn’t tell him to get lost, they offered water. Jai Gohel said the defense is not putting up a good character defense, it is just a response to the DAs questions that she had asked earlier. The inference is that the DA is making it they were cooperative and saying it appears that the Mme. DAs me not truly understand the law. again, I saw Marlisa Ferreira bouncing in her seat.
Attorney Hans argued again is not they have not put the character at issue, they only responded to the District Attorney’s Office questions that they asked this witness. This again he says is argument that she’s making and can be argued it like closing arguments.
Judge Zuniga said what is happened is not just saying that their clients are were cooperative she said they went beyond that and the character is an issue, but the way the DA is asking is very misleading. So, she is splitting the baby again. She always does this. The DA is misleading and trying to make is making an inference to something else. She needs to rephrase or questions but hasn’t been able get the right wording out on these questions, so it is misleading and appears she’s kind of conflated the issue a little bit too. So, the documents can be brought in, but not for the purpose that she wants. Government documents are allowed for certain aspects and they’re not allow for other aspects. If you have a police officer this taking a report and he’s being told something, the officers of report are not actually allowed as evidence because it’s hearsay. His but the information that he recovers through that interview by direct testimony in court can be allowed. So that it is really confusing at times I’m definitely not an attorney, so I just try to follow along the best I can.
Marlisa Ferreira, she started reading some case law and she said it was California law and so is also it’s some requirements, so it is allowable, but she said she needed to research it more. she said there was some exceptions what she was looking at and she wasn’t looking at any law books or anything like that she was looking at what they call a cheat sheet. Officers carry what they call cheat sheets of certain codes and sections, so they can to pull it out of their pocket and they can look something up really quick if they need to confirm something. Basically, it’s what she was doing is looking at a cheat sheet. The judge asked her what she was looking at and that’s what she told her.
Judge Zuniga said she wanted to look at some of these comments that were made, but she says that some of these, CLETS information is not coming in for purposes that she wants. again, she is splitting the baby though. In some of the CAD reports that she’s allowing some of the information but some of it is not.
Percy Martinez want me argued that he still sees no trustworthiness in what she’s allowing to come in. The DA started talking about public documents, but again if you’re if you’re putting down information that an officer put in a report that the he arrived at such and such address that reliable information because that something he did, but if is something he heard that’s not necessarily reliable information, he’s just documenting what he’s told. Percy Martinez said that’s the problem with some of these reports because they also don’t know where some of this information came from, because he doesn’t know where the CSO Gonzales got the information, he doesn’t know where Jason Garner got the information. There is no way to ask him now unfortunately, so it creates a problem when things like this around. some of this can be confirmed if Ms. Gonzales the CSO can come in and testify and authenticate some of the stuff, it has to be authenticated, they have to be yet the show where the information came from.
The judge says you some of things that she’s looking at the dispatch logs and again how you authenticate that? Judge Zuniga said the DA needs to look at Justice Simons book. They just went through this the other day, this is the same type issue that they talked about the other day, as to documents to be allowed as public record. She has already covered this a few days ago and it’s in regard to personal observations and just relating observations of what somebody else told them or of what others are saying. It also comes on in under public employees, not just police officers, it so he could be somebody at the revenue recovery or any public employee that they have to authenticate where the information comes from. Some of the stuff is just not reliable, so they need to understand the trustworthiness of it. The DA needs to get to the truth of the matter. Just because it’s a police report doesn’t mean it’s the truth and I’m not saying police officers lie in the reports, you know sometimes I’m sure they do, but just because a police officer writes report of Woody’s told by Michael Cooley that doesn’t mean it’s true. If an officer sees a drunk driver weaving down the road going from line to line that’s an observation, if he’s told that a car is weaving down the road going line the line then he has to question the authenticity. that’s the problem it also goes to several levels of hearsay. The Judge said that some things are misleading in the way the questions were asked by the District Attorney’s Office info in regarding both Bobby and D’s questions.
So finally, we get that resolved. We took a break. The jury finally came back at 3:30 and I tell you that this jury does not spend enough time in the courtroom. they went out at 2:25, we went through all the stuff and at 3:30 we take a break. The staff has to take break. The court reporter is working hard up there. but the jury was out for over an hour, about the 65-70 minutes to finally come back up at 3:30.
The DA is asking Ken Berringer about the Bobby Atwal interview on 6-25-2012 and he had asked if he seen Korey Kauffman. He had to refresh his memory again with the transcript, looking at the report. I’ll be honest with you, Ken Berringer looks like a pretty nice guy, he talks nicely, talks respectfully, but really poor recall. He asked Bobby Atwal if Korey Kauffman ever came into the store. Bobby said no, never seen them in the store. she asked him if he said anything about the altercation and he did not ask about the altercation, Bobby did not offer any out information on the altercation. She’s she said throwing a little blame around there and he did not mention that he saw Korey Kauffman the front of his house with about that alleged “your ass is grass” comment was made. Berringer said he did go to ninth Street to canvass as was the last place that Korey Kauffman was supposed to been going and never returned. He said he talked to Bill Borba who lived between 838 and 914 9th St., but that house on 908 Ninth St. Where Bill Borba lives is on the same lot, I don’t think there’s a fence in between Borba’s house in the Carson property. Borba disks his field all the time to keep weeds down or whatever reason he’s doing it. They were accusing Frank Carson disking to actively get rid of evidence but was Borba’s doing it because it is property. She asked him if of Borba had seen or heard anything on the alleged theory night and he said no, he didn’t see anything. So, she asked Berringer, how old is Borba? He said well he’s probably in his 80s. He looked at his report and his birthday is 12-26-1919 so that makes him about 93 years old. There was no one else at the present at the interview with Borba. He lived alone. He did not observe any rooms in the house other than the patio, they were on the patio when they did the interview. Berringer did not observe, said he did not observe or hear any noises in the area, he talked to Borba around 11 AM believe that was on April 10. she also asked up Berringer about the District Attorney’s Office interest in the case. He said he was aware that the DA’s office had an interest, but at the very beginning the case was done at the Sheriff’s office, but in May everything was transferred over to the District Attorney’s Office. That’s when they started the daily briefings and there were a high-level people from the Modesto Police Department, from the sheriff department and I don’t know if the Sheriff and the chief were involved but it sounds like they may have been in some of these meetings. There were upper-level people there was there as lieutenants, captains, undersheriff whoever with all the agencies Turlock PD, Modesto PD, Sheriff’s office, a Department of Justice, I believe was also involved I think she was she ran a total of seven agencies that were involved in this the case. The meetings were eventually moved over to Ceres Police Department. She asked him if Ceres police had any involvement in the investigation. He said no, they’re just using Ceres Police Department as kind of a focal point because they also had a wiretaps going on that were being monitored through Ceres Police Department. He said originally, he had met several times with the Sgt. At the time was Bajaran and then it was told to meet at the DA’s office with the investigators over there and that started in May.
Judge Zuniga at this point, Marlisa Ferreira’s having a terrible time getting these questions out today. Judge Zuniga started asking questions for her. She did it again, not questions plural, just one question about where they were meeting. he talked about some time later they ended up going to Ceres police with the meetings there were some again lieutenants and higher-level people that were involved. They were talking so fast I can’t keep up with all of it. I wish I knew shorthand. I wish I could audio record, but they won’t let recording devices in. He wasn’t sure when they started meeting at the Ceres Police Department he said it was late May early June. There was also wiretaps that were going on in June that were being monitored in Ceres Police Department. I think Marlisa Ferreira is saying that the defense is claiming the District Attorney’s Office had a vendetta here, so she’s trying to prove that they weren’t that involved in the case.
Now there’s a recording that Marlisa Ferreira and Kirk Bunch interviewed Jim DeMartini. He is a County supervisor for Stanislaus County. For some reason Jim DeMartini had made a claim of the cost of the case at the time of the prelim and they wanted to know where he got his information from. So, they interviewed him, and Marlisa Ferreira told DeMartini that the District Attorney’s Office has done about 400 interviews in this case at that point and that was two and half years ago, I believe it was in March 2016.
Berringer said he never met with Birgit Fladager, he did meet with Dave Harris and he did some of the briefings initially regarding the wiretaps and the minimization that must be done on a wiretap. Minimization is when somebody is monitoring that wiretap and you call up and talk to your doctor, they’re supposed to minimize the call and when you minimize a call that means they stop recording the call. That’s way with the doctor or priest or an attorney.
he said he did not interview Linda Sue Burns, Eula Keyes, Michael Maunakea, Scott Rollins, Charlie O’Dell, Ricky Cooley and I don’t know why she asked that he said no he didn’t interview those people. He never asked Mike Cooley if he had been stealing from Frank Carson. He never talked to Amber Keister, who was the I believe half-sister of Korey Kauffman if I remember right. there’s two other people and I’m drawing a blank on the names right now. She asked him if they ever targeted Bobby or D Atwal. There are objections. It is just the way the questions are asked, its leading. He never had a vendetta for Frank Carson or the Atwals or anybody else.
The jury was sent out again had at 3:51, they were brought in at 3:30 and 21 minutes later there were sent out again. Not very productive for the jury. they had a couple issues that they had to take up. Said there’s other people that he doesn’t remember that were present, and so some of this is not offering what you call for the truth and she’s asking why is relevant. Marlisa Ferreira says the that they were aware of the case, but the defense is claiming they’re trying not to show a personal vendetta even though the Atwals were aware of the case and there that there try not to show, by anyone, trying to show any biases against Frank Carson. She anticipates them to say is a matter of procedure to be done due to Frank Carson and there were some privilege issues to that they were briefed on and talked about some things.
Jai Gohel argued the actions of all of the people involved in one meeting does not show one there are no prejudices. He is saying it’s an ongoing thing and you look at the overall picture, like Marlisa says, at the end of the day, the of the overall picture, how you look at everything that was done and how is done when it was done blah blah blah… He is saying it will show, that it does show prejudices by the investigators and District Attorney’s Office in this case. the judge overrules the defense objection to that being used. She says her double hearsay especially with now with officer Garner being deceased and so that she’s not been allowed of those to commit. Again, Marlisa a Ferreira quoted it was 1282 and 1283 of the Penal Code and she says she’s can review it tonight and come back tomorrow and the may have an argument on behalf of that. That was it that was the end of the day.
Good morning everybody. This is Marty of Dawgsblog. This is the noontime report of the morning session of Frank Carson et al. on September 27, 2018.
Court was scheduled, actually started at 9:30; I thought it was 10 o’clock, but I got here early anyway. Judge was on the bench around 9:40.
They want to talk about, before the jury gets up, they want to talk about this flyer which is evidence number 423. The DA objected due to third-party culpability where it says on the flyer that somebody tried to kill, attack, kill whatever, Korey Kauffman just a few days prior to him going missing and then named, I believe, it was Rodolfo Gonzalez that was named in the flyer and she said it’s highly prejudicial. There were also some comments in there that idea he was threatened to be cut from ear to ear. There was no information where the accusation came from, this is some information that was put up by the family, was from the flyer came from, not through law enforcement. Percy Martinez argued that the DA’s first objection that she had made was about the date that has been put on the flyer of 3:29 of 2012 and that was the date that the law enforcement was passed around. The second was a year-to-year statement that could be redacted. He also noted there was mostly a black car that threatened Korey Kauffman. It was an unknown make, Rodolfo Gonzalez had driven a black car. Also, the defendant was not going to show Rodolfo, the defense was not to show Rodolfo Gonzalez was responsible for the disappearance, only that the there were some threats prior to that. Lynette Clarity witnessed threats by others, and they want flyer as to other threats only and theres not anyone. Apparently, there were several other people that made threats to Korey and there’s not anyone that they were naming by name. Marlissa Ferreira argued they can’t get around the hearsay, they can call Lynette Clarity if they still want to get this third-party culpability stuff in there. The Rodolfo Gonzales incident was totally separate and different. She said there was no doubt the threats have at Korey Kauffman’s house was Robert Woody and a BMW car and she said the information was also two levels of hearsay. Percy Martinez argued that the people were very quick to jump to the fact that it was a newer vehicle at the Korey Kauffman residence. John Payton was not clear about that in fact that he compared, the car to his sister’s car which was a 90’s model which was a lot older than the vehicle there that was supposed to be the Atwal’s vehicle. Kim Stout never ID the cards. It was Kirk Bunch who said it was a BMW, not Kim Stout. Attorney Hans made an argument that appeared that the District Attorney’s Office was picking and choosing what information what witnesses they want to count on and what they said. John Payton was not that clear. They were not clear about what he had said and Kim Stout was certain it was not Bobby or Dy Atwal in the car. Jai Gohel argued that objection was made after the DA had already marked the evidence that was in question. The DA brought it up originally, showed it to Deputy Barringer and then had it marked it as evidence #423. The DA is now objecting to the evidence that she had put in. Marlissa Ferreira said they can look at the transcript the two things that Kim Stout ID the car and Dalgit Atwal and Robert Woody was in the car. Lynette Clarity said she did not say Robert Woody’s in the car but Rodolfo Gonzalez. She said John Payton agreed with the Kirk Bunch claim that it was a BMW and Robert Woody also said that was him and Dalgit Atwal. John Payton said only one person was in the car and now describing some other male in the car
that shows another incident with Korey Kauffman DA was throwing out many theories here. Judge Zuniga said it’s up to the jury to determine in regards to the Kim Stout testimony but the DA is complaining, I’m sorry Dalgit Atwal was complaining they took the car. Now listen to this closely, Dalgit Atwal complaining that they took his car, but the DA did, to Marlissa Ferreira and to her credit, did point out that it was the Mike Cooley incident where that happened and not the Kauffman incident at his house that Judge Zuniga referring to subjects and again judge was confused judging us as well. It appeared again that if the defense was trying to do, and around on the third-party culpability for she has not allowed anybody but Mike Cooley to be questioned as part of third party culpability. Maybe somebody else could have done the crime. She has not allowed anybody else, and it is still not allowed, is also hearsay. The DA’s objection was sustained. Judge Zuniga then went through the flyer line by line, having redacted in certain areas.
At 10:05 the jury was called up. Ken Barringer was on the stand. Percy Martinez continued his cross of Barringer by showing him the item numbers 423 which was the flyer again and said Kevin Pickett had made up his own flyers. He saw some flyers on Google searches on the Internet, remember the said flyers like in plural that he showed Percy Martinez showed all the flyers that he had. Barringer had only seen one and that’s the one he found in the Internet. He did not receive it from Kevin Pickett. They did go through a list of them. There were seven of them, there was only one of them that Ken Barringer had seen prior. He said it was on April 2012, I believe, is for 4-10 of 2012 that he had talked to Kevin Pickett. He did not ask Pickett what time was the last time he saw Korey Kauffman and I think that’s very interesting that he didn’t do that investigation of missing person but did as when he went missing. He talked again on May 18th of 2012 with Frank Navarro and John Evers present. He said somebody had mentioned Mulberry trailer park and law enforcement had to call Kevin Pickett and Korey Kauffman in an unmarked vehicle at the trailer park after they bought drugs. He said Frank Navarro was doing an interview but he was present and Ken Barringer read the transcript of the interview in fact had read the entire transcript because he didn’t have a good recall. And then there was an objection by the DA which led to a long sidebar, a long side bar. Ken Barringer was talking about the undercover that had stopped Pickett and Kauffman that night on the 29th. It was the last day that Kevin Pickett had seen Korey Kauffman alive.
Kevin Pickett never mentioned the 30th at any time actually, that he remembered nowhere in that interview. Barringer did not recall the exact date of the contact that showed that was in the system within the seller’s office records. A system of that stopped by deputies at the trailer park. He said he didn’t get, that he didn’t ask Kevin Pickett about exact dates, but he did talk to Pickett about the 29th finally, this is a later interview that he saw Korey Kauffman. On June 25, 2012, during the Kathy Grinold’s interview, he did not recalled giving her a specific date of disappearance. He said he did gave her a flyer with his name on it as he did with all the people he talked to. Kathy Grinold did not say anything or he asked her about three men that she’s on the property, but she did said she did not see that, also talked to Dylan by the name of Sean, Kathy Grinold son, who originally said he was living there but then said he was not. He talked to the neighbor Bill Borba, but then gave him a flyer and the last of flyer he left at Christine D’Filippo’s residence at 838 9th St. Christine D’Fillipo said there were two scary guys watching the house and talking about the women that had come over about a year prior to that interview. And so that would’ve been around 2011, nearly 2011 sometime. He said that Kevin Pickett also had talked to people at 838-908 9th St. Kevin Pickett said that Bill Carson was the one there, was a caretaker there or living there. On July 12, 2012, they did visit Frank Carson at his office with no appointment and he had told Frank Navarro I know you do things and that he didn’t trust him, led to another sidebar and then he was asked if Frank Carson had returned or sent the fax letter back to Ken Barringer. There was objection. Again Percy Martinez also asked him that he visited the Carson office on 7-12 of 2012 and then they did a search warrant. Three days later in July 15, 2012 and then 7-12 2012 there was wiretap in place at that time. He visited them on again July 12 and then he did started, they were doing surveillance on him on July 13 and he was assigned to survey Frank Carson at a briefing and was told Carson had 1995, white, suburban, and the surveillance was lost off of I-5. Barringer was in the pickup truck, another pickup truck following Carson. He said Frank Carson was doing the speed limit. He was not speeding and making evasive maneuvers. Frank Carson never went to Pop n Cork, didn’t go to Walter Wells house, didn’t go to Scott McFarlane South didn’t go to Quintenar’s house, didn’t go to the Atwal’s house, didn’t go to Mariposa County, didnt go to Robert Woody’s house. He had stopped by the house on Fink Road. In fact, Frank Carson was checking locks to make sure the house was secure as it appeared. He did not recall the Fink roadhouse was part of the search warrant. He was aware of the cadaver dogs that were used at 838-914 9th St. during a search warrant and 9-89 of 2012,three weeks after the Frank Carson property was searched, he appeared at the office with no appointment that was made prior to his going there and dropped off the list of questions. What time he went to Frank Carson’s office on the ninth? It was at 6:16 PM and he said the door was unlocked but he didn’t just walk in. He knocked on the door and somebody had opened it for him. He did record the conversation with Frank Carson on that day, but he was asked also asked if he recorded the Mike Cooley interview one for Canon 12 when he first got on the case and he said he did not. Going back to the surveillance on Frank Carson on July 13, 2012 Frank Carson went through Crows Landing then and I-5 southbound to Stir Road and then he actually got on I-5 northbound then went around to Stir Road, got back on 9th by I-5, southbound went to Fink Road and they said we went west on Fink Road. Percy Martinez asked him what is west of Fink Road and Barringer said, well there’s a dump there. Is there anything else there and he said, no, just empties off that dump. He said did you follow him to the dump. He said he didn’t followed him. He lost him at Fink were I-5 and Fink Road and was not able to continue surveillance but did used cell phone to call Frank Navarro who continued on the surveillance so but he didnt know if Frank Carson went to the dump or not. Percy Martinez asked him if he knew that Fink Road doesn’t go anywhere else but to the interests of the dump and he was not aware. Again he was asked about the search at 914 9th St. and 838 9th St. and they were done by cadaver dogs and the second team of cadaver dogs were done on the second property after they did the first. They called the fire department out to cut the locks on the containers as they were all locked up. Percy Martinez had no further questions.
Attorney Hans started talking about 7-2 of 2012, where he had gone to Pop n Cork to talk to Dalgit Atwal. Dalgit offered him some drink. He did not recall if there was customers coming and going. He said that Dalgit Atwal was compliant, respectful, and asked him to move back to the back of the store because there may have been some customers going on but he wasn’t sure. He showed them a photo of Korey Kauffman. He was not familiar with, looking at the fellow he said he didn’t know him. When he asked about Kevin Pickett; the stepparents were regulars in the store and he works in the afternoons. He comes in at 4 or 5 PM and then Attorney Hans asked about 4-10 of 2012 where he talked to Mike Cooley and he said Cooley was being confrontational and excited and talkative in his past experience was on enforcement in regards to people under the influence in his experience with detecting that, which led to an objection by the DA and another sidebar. And so he came back after the sidebar, Attorney Hans asked if he ever arrested anybody 400 and 411, 550 agent ,has he any training that he said yes and he said to a 24 hour class on recognizing signs of 11- 550. And one of the factors are, several factors are very talkative and have an excited demeanor and he said they did. It appeared that that was a couple of factors that Mike Cooley was exhibiting.
Hans asked him when he talked to Kevin Pickett. It was the 3-29 or 3-30 at the Mike Cooley house that Korey was last seen. He said that Pickett did say that he was last seen at 3-30-2012 at the Cooley’s house and he asked about the prelim testimony on 3-9 of 16 on the 4-10 of 12 interview he asked Kevin Pickett when he last saw Korey Kauffman ,he said no, so he said he didn’t answer the question but he was present when Kevin Pickett was asked and said it was 3-29 of 2012 that was actually an interview that was done by Frank Navarro. Hans had no further questions.
Jai Gohel began cross and he was asked about that the information he got from CSO Dean Gonzales. He gave the information to the investigation, or Gonzales gave information or the reporter. However, he retrieved it to investigate other one piece that he said was Korey Kauffman was last seen with a parolee Mike Cooley at his residence and there is a gesture by the DDA by the term parolee. It was an issue that had to be resolved later as suggestion want to do a sidebar. This is to calling him a parolee. Said he has been a police officer for 11 years and one of the duties of the law enforcement officer is to write reports and document information. He was asked if he didn’t exactly record information but did highlight points of the interview on three occasions referred Korey Kauffman, this talk about Mike Cooley, three occasion referred to Korey Kauffman referred in the past tense and this is about two weeks since he went missing. No information Korey Kauffman was either murdered or just, or even dead. Mike Cooley was the last person to see Korey Kauffman alive, talked about the 6-25-2012 interview with Balgit Atwal at Pop n Cork, the 6-25 2012 interview with Balgit Atwal at Pop n Cork Balgit Atwal was polite and cooperative. He asked about Korey Kauffman. He said he didn’t know him, Kirk Bunch Kevin Barringer left his card and told him to call you if he sees Korey Kauffman so it would make sense. He would not call if he does not see him. He said he did some canvassing on ninth Street and that was documented on June 25, 2012 three months after the missing person. No one saw or heard any scaffull or gunshots that night. Jai Gohel asked him if you talk to Bill Barba who lived next door and had an open access to that lot and he said he did not hear anything, nor anyone else in the neighborhood had either. He dropped a flyer for Christine D’Filippo’s house. He made contacts several days later, the flyer said 3-29 of 2012 of the missing person date. Balgit Atwal said he has seen the flyer. He said the Dalgit Atwal had seen the flyer because it was at the store and as a law enforcement officer he was distributing flyers with the 3-29-2012 date on it. He said that originally the Sgt. Bogeran in 2012 gave him the assignment to look into the case and Kevin Barringer said he was given the information on 1-14 of 2012 testimony prelim he said that are Jai Gohel was asked him if he said that he had challenged the DAs office that showed interest in the case two weeks after Korey Kauffman went missing. He said he had briefings at the DAs office but did not recall when. There were objections.
The jury went out for lunch at 11:46 and Judge Zuniga said the nature of the district attorney’s questioning some of these witnesses to show that the DA not was not involved in the case and Jai Gohel was trying to rebut some of that information. The DA argued that the defense was misstating some of the evidence that is not true. Maybe they just need the defense just need to rephrase the question. Jai Gohel gave some citations in the prelim that he was referring to that they were told to go the District Attorney’s Office for information and briefings and he said it was almost daily. So he’s not sure which facts are not true. Judge Zuniga re-reading the transcript of the real-time of today’s testimony said he needed to lay a better foundation and she said the Mike Cooley parolee comments were not relevant. It’s prejudicial and she was not going allowing to do it anymore. Jai Gohel stated that he wished one to make his record that Mike Cooley testified that he had a parole search done on his house under the parole search, under parole status and so that with some of searches were done that were involved in this case. He said Mike Cooley’s a dangerous person, kept talking past tense about the missing person.
So they just made a record of all they want to do. Also noted that was there and they brought into the courtroom, Sarah and Tom O’Keefe. Tom O’Keefe is CHP officer who testified early on and she was here with him. They were here to testify for their not gonna get to him on today. They were ordered back for October 3 which is next week at 9 AM.
Will be back at the 1:30 this afternoon and don’t forget the podcast tonight.
I walked into the courtroom this morning at 10:00AM with arguments already in progress. The first thing I heard concerned who was in the black car that allegedly drove by Michael Cooley’s house and made some alleged threats. There was talk about the testimony of John Paden. There was talk about Rudolfo Gonzalez, and how the defense should have the right to bring up the fact that he made threats against Korey Kauffman just days before he went missing. Judge Zuniga states that the jury will have to decide who is right. Judge Zuniga talks about a wiretap where Daljit Atwal and Baljit Athwal were complaining about someone taking their car. Judge Zuniga apologizes when she realizes that she was confused when she made some comments about this situation. Judge Zuniga states that this is simply an attempt by the defense to get around her ruling against 3rd party culpability on everyone except Michael Cooley. She states that the nexus has not been met concerning Rudolfo Gonzalez, and it is precluded. She states that it is hearsay. She allows some of the report concerning Rudolfo Gonzalez to be used by the defense, but prevents most of the report from being presented to the jury.
At 10:05AM, the jury is brought into the courtroom, and Detective Barringer is brought to the stand. Defense attorney Percy Martinez shows Exhibit 423, which is a flyer concerning Korey Kauffman, to Detective Barringer. He states that he recognizes the flyer. Detective Barringer’s name was spelled Darringer on the flyer. Detective Barringer states that Kevin Pickett already had one of these flyers when he went to talk to him. He states that he does not know who prepared the flyer. He states that he saw flyers on the internet when he did a Google search. Percy Martinez now brings up 6 different flyers for Detective Barringer to look at. Detective Barringer only recognizes one of these flyers, and says that he saw that flyer on the internet. He said that he saw this flyer when he did a search in early April of 2012. He states that he went to talk to Kevin Pickett on 04/10/2012. He states that he did not remember if Kevin Pickett had a flyer at that time. He states that he spoke to Kevin Pickett once again on 05/18/2018. On that interview, he was with Detective Frank Navarro, and Detective Jon Evers. Detective Barringer states that they talked about Kevin Pickett and Korey Kauffman going to Mulberry Mobile Home Park to buy drugs. He states that he investigated this. Detective Barringer states that Detective Frank Navarro presented the flyer to Kevin Pickett. He states that he did talk to Kevin Pickett on 05/18/2012. He states that he described the undercover truck, and the information was given to Detective Navarro. He states that he was present when this was done. Detective Barringer had to be refreshed to remember he said “Oh Really” in the interview. These words indicate that he was involved with the conversation. He now admits that Kevin Pickett told him about the undercover truck during the interview. This is objected to, and we have a side bar. Judge Zuniga overrules the objection to this question and answer.
Percy Martinez now asks Detective Barringer if Kevin Pickett had said that the last day that he saw Korey Kauffman on 03/28/2012 or 03/29/2012. Detective Barringer admits that Kevin Pickett never said the last day he saw Korey Kauffman was 03/30/2012. Detective Barringer testifies that he checked the department’s computer system, and found that the last contact the authorities had concerning Korey Kauffman was on 03/29/2012. He states that he gave this information to Kevin Pickett. Detective Barringer once again states that Kevin Pickett told him that he last saw Korey Kauffman on 03/29/2012.
Percy Martinez starts talking about an interview of Kathy Grinnolds that was done on 06/25/2012. He states that he does not remember if he told her the date that Korey Kauffman was last seen. He states that he gave her Exhibit 423, which was the missing person flyer that the family had prepared. Detective Barringer states that Kathy Grinnolds did not say anything about three people being on the Carson property. He states that he interviewed her son Sean who at the time was living with Kathy Grinnolds. He states that he interviewed neighbor John Borba, and gave him the copy of Exhibit 423 (The flyer that the family prepared.) He states that he left the flyer at the house where Christina DeFelippo was living at, and that he had contact with Christina DeFelippo on 06/28/2012. He states that Christina DeFelippo described two white tattoo laden men (The White Trash Twins) watching her house. Christina DeFelippo told him that two women came over a year before (Around June of 2011.) Christina DeFelippo told Detective Barringer that a family member of Korey Kauffman came over to talk to her. Detective Barringer states that when he talked to Michael Cooley, he said that he had gone over to the 9th Street properties to talk with someone named Bill Carson. Detective Barringer did not remember this when he was first asked about it, and had to be refreshed.
Detective Barringer tells Percy Martinez that he did not receive any information when he went uninvited to Frank Carson’s Law Office on 07/12/2012. He states that Frank Carson told him that he was in the middle of a murder trial after being refreshed. He also had to be refreshed when he was asked if Frank Carson had told him: “I know how you do things.” He also did not remember that Frank Carson had sent him a fax on 07/13/2012. We have a side bar after this question. Detective Barringer finally admits that he had the fax on his desk at 8:00AM on 07/16/2012.
Percy Martinez gets Detective Barringer to state that he was an investigator that was present during the searches that were done on the Carson property. He admits that wiretaps were in place on 07/12/2012 when he visited Frank Carson. He states that he followed Frank Carson on 07/13/2012. He admits that he was part of the “Task Force,” but did not admit to calling it the “Task Force.” He admits that he was assigned to surveil Frank Carson by the “Task Force.” He states that Frank Carson was driving a white 1995 Chevrolet Suburban when he followed him. He states that he was driving a late model pickup truck when he followed Frank Carson. He states that Frank Carson did not speed, did not go to Pop N Cork Liquors, did not go to Walter Wells’ home, did not go to Scott McFarlane’s home, did not go to Eduardo Quintinar’s home, did not go to the Athwal’s homes, did not go to Mariposa, and did not go to visit Robert Woody. Detective Barringer states that Frank Carson eventually ended up at his Turlock property, and was checking his property and the locks on his storage containers.
Detective Barringer states that two sets of cadaver dogs were used to search the Carson properties and the neighboring properties in Turlock. He states that he did not have an appointment when he went to the Law Office of Frank Carson on 08/09/2012, and this visit was around three weeks after the searches of the Carson properties. We now take a break until 11:10AM.
After the break, Percy Martinez goes into how Detective Barringer had gone to Frank Carson’s Law Office on 08/09/2012 and delivered a sheet of questions. He states that it was 6:16PM, and admits that the office was closed at the time for business. He states that he knocked on the door, and eventually entered the office when he discovered that the door was unlocked. He states that he saw Georgia DeFelippo when he got inside. He states that he recorded this encounter, but states that he did not record his conversation with Michael Cooley. He states that he prepared a report after he visited the law office of Frank Carson, and gave the report to Kirk Bunch, Frank Navarro, and Jon Evers.
He states that when he followed Frank Carson, that Frank went to the dump on Fink Road in Crows Landing. Frank then went South on I-5 to Stuhr Road, and took Stuhr Road North back to Fink Road. Barringer states that he did not follow Frank Carson after he went to the dump on Fink Rd in Crows Landing, because Fink Road ends at the dump. He states that he turned the surveillance over to Frank Navarro after Frank went to the dump. Percy has no further questions at this time.
Defense attorney Hans Hjertonsson takes over. Hans talks about when Barringer went to visit Daljit Atwal at Pop N Cork Liquors on 07/02/2012. Barringer states that Daljit Atwal offered Barringer a drink, and they went to a back room to talk. He states that Daljit Atwal was respectful, and courteous. Barringer states that he showed Daljit a photograph of Korey Kauffman, and that Daljit did not recognize the photo, but said that the person might have been in his store. Barringer states that Daljit told him that Korey Kauffman’s parents had been to the store. Daljit told Barringer that he works at night at the store, and he is at the store after 4:05PM daily. Barringer states that he had contact with Michael Cooley on 04/10/2012, and that he seemed to be confrontational, excited, and talkative. Hans tries to show that Michael Cooley was on drugs because of his behavior, but this resulted in many objections, and eventually a side bar. After the side bar, Hans asks Barringer if he had ever arrested anyone for a 11550, which is related to drugs and narcotic possession and use. Barringer: “Yes.” Barringer admits that he has been trained to recognize a person being on drugs. Barringer has to admit that being excited and talkative could indicate that a person is on stimulants. Barringer denies that he asked Kevin Pickett when the last day he saw Korey Kauffman was, but that he was present when one of the other investigators asked the question. Hans has no further questions.
Jai Gohel takes over asking the questions. Barringer admits that he used information provided by Ms. Gonzalez to conduct further investigation. Barringer admits that writing reports is important. Barringer admits that he did not record the interview of Michael Cooley on 04/10/2012. He states that he summarized the interview with his report. Jai Gohel gets Barringer to admit that Michael Cooley spoke of Korey Kauffman in the past tense three times during the interview. Barringer states that he never told Michael Cooley that Korey Kauffman was dead during the interview. Jai points out that Michael Cooley was talking about Korey Kauffman in the past tense less than two weeks after he had gone missing. Barringer admits on the stand that Michael Cooley was the last person to see Korey Kauffman alive. Jai Gohel now goes into the 06/25/2012 interview of Baljit Athwal at Pop N Cork Liquors. Barringer states that Baljit Athwal was polite, and was working at the counter. Barringer states that he left his card with Baljit, and told him to call him if he saw Korey Kauffman. Barringer states that he did canvassing of the neighborhood on 06/25/2012, but did not have a form to follow for the canvassing. Barringer states that he documented the canvassing, and that the canvassing was done less than 3 months after Korey Kauffman had gone missing. Nobody reported anything about hearing gun shots, or skuffles.
Jai Gohel gets Barringer to state that he gave Christina DeFelippo a flyer on 06/25/2012. He states that she was not there when he left the flyer. He states that he made contact with Christina DeFelippo after he left the flyer, and that they flyer said that 03/29/2012 was the date that Korey Kauffman was last seen.
Jai Gohel, after Judge Zuniga reviewed some transcripts, was allowed to ask Barringer if the DA’s Office had shown an interest in the case less than two weeks after Korey Kauffman had gone missing. Barringer states that Kirk Bunch was already involved with the investigation at this point. Barringer is asked if the DA’s Office was holding daily briefings on the case. This was objected to vigorously. Judge Zuniga sends the jury out early for lunch at 11:45AM.
After the courtroom was cleared of the witness, and the jury, Judge Zuniga tells Jai Gohel that he will have to re-phrase his question. Judge Zuniga now states that a question about Michael Cooley being on probation is not relevant. She states that only his convictions are relevant. Jai Gohel states that Michael Cooley has already testified that he consented to searches because he was on parole at the time. Jai Gohel states that this issue is already before the jury. Judge Zuniga states that the question is still not relevant. It is time for lunch now. I will be there tomorrow morning to report on what I see and hear.