OC Register comments

This morning I read a comment from the OC Register on-line. Someone who called himself "observer" wrote some of his feelings about Dean's guilt. From his comments, I am guessing that it is one of the investigators from the D.A.'s office. He was too cowardly to sign his name. At least my comments have my name on them. His comments all had the bent that Dean was supposed to prove his innocence not that the prosecution was supposed to prove guilt.
He stated things {like fact} that were not in evidence which reminded me of Gundy's closing comments. He wondered about things that made no sense. One of the things he said was "How could Dean get blood transfered to his sock and shoes underneath long pants?" I guess he wasn't in the courtroom when Dean said that he was wearing long SHORTS when the transfer happened. His question was a good one though in questioning the prosecution's case, because the prosecutor wanted the jury to believe that Dean somehow got blood on his socks under his LONG pants during the murder. Hmmmm??
Another question that he asked was "How could a sneeze splatter upward?" I guess he wasn't in the courtroom for that answer either. Dean sneezed, which caused a bloody nose which he tried to stop off with his fingers while driving. As his fingers get full of blood, it makes sense that he would shake them off and then go back to trying to stop the flow. This is exactly how the prosecutor thinks the blood got on the windshield except that he says that Dean is shaking his finger from a knife cut. Dean never said the splatters were from the sneeze. He thought the ones on the dash might have been though. People just do not seem to listen to a defendant do they???
[especially an investigator for the D.A./, right Sullivan?]
This "Observer" also thought Andrea was arrogant on the stand. If any person was arrogant in that court room it was the prosecutor and then Johnny Roy. Andrea was asked a speculative question by the D.A., and then when she speculated, he accused her of "speculation". That was strange. I just think he was intimidated by goodness, because Andrea is the most honest and nice person I have ever known.
Anyway, that the [investigator] "observer" wrote in to the newspaper means that maybe he is battling his conscience. He is trying a last ditch effort to convince himself that he was right in his feelings and investigations. Too bad though that he lied about seeing the blazer in the defense video. He still hasn't reached that honest spot yet in his soul. Our investigator from the last trial who was an ex-cop saw no blazer there just like the rest of us. I pray for "observer" that in his future cases, he is not so judgemental. All of us on the defense side feel good about ourselves and know that we have remained honest citizens. Our souls are clear.

A Friend and Experienced Juror

Letter to the Jurors:

I am a family friend who really got to know Dean over the four years he was out awaiting his appeal. I had no idea he was accused of a crime until the D.A. had him rearrested, accusing him of a capital crime that landed him in jail again until his trial. I was able to spend time with Dean and get to know him and found him to be a very respectful and interesting person.

I know that Dean is not guilty of this crime, not because I know Dean and know who he is, but because I have seen the same evidence that you, the jurors have seen, and cannot see how, after a thorough evaluation of each piece of evidence, a reasonable person could conclude guilt in this case. I am extremely disappointed in you, the jurors in this case, for not performing your duty, for not fully evaluating the evidence, for not fully understanding what evidence is, for not weighing the facts as presented, for presuming guilt, for being taken in by the Oscar Winning Performance by the D.A.

I have sat on at least a dozen juries over the years, I have been the foreman, the lone hold out with eleven others voting against me, I have infuriated other jurors because I did not agree with them, I have not agreed to a quick deliberation because the weekend was coming up or I had something more important to do. Nothing was more important to me than to do my duty and give the defendant in each case that I have heard my complete and full attention in determining the truth through a thorough examination of the evidence.

I have read that some of you did not understand the concept of reasonable doubt. Here is the definition of reasonable doubt that is read to juries prior to deliberation, with copies also provided for the jurors in the jury deliberation room.

Reasonable doubt is defined as follows: It is not a mere possible doubt,
because everything relating to human affairs is open to some possible or
imaginary doubt. It is that state of the case which, after the entire
comparison and consideration of all the evidence, leaves the minds of the
jurors in that condition that they cannot say they feel an abiding
conviction of the truth of the charge.

The prosecution has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt each element of the crimes charged in the information and that the defendant was the perpetrator of any such charged crimes. The defendant is not required to prove himself innocent or to prove that any other person
committed the crimes charged.

Reasonable doubt is sometimes referred to as: to a moral certainty. Put another way, you better be damned sure.

Were you all damned sure that the evidence supported your verdict? Were you damned sure that was a white blazer in the video? Some of your comments seem to suggest that may be it was a blazer, or there was a likeness of a blazer. A likeness of anything could be anything. I guess you were damned sure that there was a likeness of a blazer? I saw the same video that you all saw, the washed out version that the D.A. wanted you to see. Where is the likeness of anything in that video? Ok, so you say there is a likeness of a blazer in the video, how is it tied to the crime, did the D.A. tell you? Did the Sheriff find evidence in the blazer that definitively tied it to the crime scene? NO!!! Why, because it was not at the crime scene, and therefore, Dean was not at the crime scene. The Sheriff had that vehicle for six weeks, testing every inch of that vehicle for some evidence that tied it to the crime scene. They tore the vehicle apart looking for something that was not there. They found evidence that Dean was in the blazer, visible and microscopic blood from Dean.

You heard testimony that there was soaking wet blood from the victim on clothes. How is it possible for clothes seemingly dripping in blood to somehow not transfer any of that blood to the interior of the blazer? Did the perpetrators, after committing this crime, hang around the crime scene long enough to strip off all of the bloody clothes, seal them in a plastic bag, change into other clothes and get into the blazer and drive away? This sounds more believable than the D.A.’s version of 16 and 17 year old boys, with the forensic technology that we have today, completely sanitizing a vehicle so well that there was no trace of them or the victim in the vehicle. Most 16 and 17 year old boys don’t even know how to lift up the toilet seat when they pee, let alone thoroughly sanitize a vehicle. Also, they were such experts at sanitizing this vehicle that they knew to leave microscopic and visible blood of Dean’s in the vehicle as well as fingerprints from two other individuals that were in the vehicle days before this crime was committed that were also not visible. Oh, and since this was Dean’s vehicle, he helped clean the vehicle and he chose to leave visible traces of himself in the vehicle along with leaves, dirt, other trash, and also decides to leave tennis shoes with a blood drop on them in his closet, for what, a memory of this event. An unbelievable story and all of this is not reasonable doubt?

I also want to point out to you that guilty people do not usually take the stand in defense of themselves. Dean took the stand and told you his story truthfully. For the four years that Dean was out of jail, he had the opportunity to visit relatives outside the country. Would a guilty person come back to this country for a trial just so that he could spend the rest of his life in jail?

The facts as presented by the D.A. are not reasonable. Another portion of jury instructions indicates: Statements made by attorneys during the trial are not evidence. You had this with you in the deliberation room and it was read to you by the judge, before the trial began and just before deliberations. Why do you all give so much weight and credibility to what the D.A. said at trial? It is as if you hung on his every word, his statements cemented in your heads, guilty until proven innocent. Statements made by attorneys are not evidence, why did you not remember this? Why did you not decide for yourselves? This was not some theatrical play that the D.A. played a starring role in and you were his supporting cast. This life and your poor decisions have affected a life. Where was your morality? You all have to live with your decision for the rest of your lives, you have to live with the guilt that you made the wrong decision, the guilt that you did not give your full and undivided attention to the process, that you did not thoroughly evaluate and weigh each piece of evidence, that you failed to understand the concept of reasonable doubt. You still have time to correct this injustice. It is not unlawful or immoral to admit your mistake. You can still save a life.

Lance

Cuts on Deans' hands

The juror inquiries have been going on and they are trying to defend their position. One juror said that he couldn't get past the cut on Dean's hand and that no one could corroborate that he cut it at work. This shows again how the jurors expected Dean to prove his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt instead of the opposite way around. Common sense seems to evade the juror on this issue. Lets see, Dean worked at a mechanical shop around alot of equipment and sharp edges. He crushed filters, cleaned up scrap, and kept things neat. He was always scratching and cutting up his hands. Men who work around hazards do not inform everyone anytime that they get cuts or scratches. They go clean it up and bandage it from the first aid kit. It is not an important announcement to make that people will remember 11 years later. Dean showed the jurors that he had numerous cuts on his hands on the photograph that the prosecutor gave him. He could not remember each and every incident they took place. Who could???? Jeez, it sure is his bad luck that he worked in a hazardous area and had cuts on his hands around the time that a murder took place. Little did he know that a juror would find this supicious 11 years later. What a joke.
I guess it is his bad luck that he suffers from rhinitis and has nose bleeds and that he had two around the time of the murder. How could he know that one day a zealous detective and prosecutor would link that to a murder??
Lets see, a former mechanic testified that people at work did cut their fingers on a rusting faucet and I testified to Deans nose bleeds. The jurors only wanted to believe the prosecutor though. Why is that? Are they excited about being punitive to someone like the prosecutor is?
The mechanic who testified could not even remember that Dean had uniforms. How is he supposed to notice and remember a minor cut? Dean cut his hand washing up before leaving for lunch. He hurriedly bandaged it and went to lunch...... what.... no announcement about his small wound????? He wasn't five years old.
What the jurors had little of (common sense), they did not use. If they had laid out on paper each coincidence and the explanations; they would have seen what is called REASONABLE DOUBT.
Another juror ignored that Dean's uniform was turned in late. They would rather believe it was missing. "What a coincidence that one showed up missing." they said. NO that was normal and to be expected, since the reason it showed up late, was because the sheriff arrested him right out of his car that had the uniform to be returned in it. We did not find that uniform in the trunk until weeks later when we opened the trunk. WE turned it in late and then got the credit back when we did. There is no coincidence here. If the sheriff had not arrested him until after he had returned the uniform, there never would have been a missing one. This was brought out at trial, but went over the jurors heads because all they wanted to do was be on the prosecution side.
How can any defendant give reasonable explanations for things when jurors refuse to believe them?
A prosecutor and detectives take any little coincidences and make them link to their case. The more they can do this, the more points they can get in convincing a jury of guilt. Tax payers complain about the waste of their money on appeals, but the reason that so many are granted is because of this kind of rail-roading and jurors going along with it.
Dean deserved a fair trial and a fair deliberation. HE DID NOT GET THAT! So jurors, when he does get his appeal, the taxpayers can thank you for not doing your job. Your taxes are paying for Dean to be housed in prison instead of being a productive citizen like he was for the years that he was free. Your taxes will pay for the great expense of another trial. Your soul will pay in eternity for your rush to judgement. You will be judged just like you judged Dean.

News from Dean

I got a long letter from Dean today. He is well but still a bit depressed. He thinks that he will shake it soon. I like his optimism, but I think this sadness will remain for awhile. He is safe and has a decent cell mate. Because of the economy, the supplies are low there. If any one wants to send him something, he needs envelopes with stamps embossed on them. He cannot receive more than 10 at a time. He also needs writing paper. He cannot have more than 12 sheets at a time. I always rip off pages from a large writing tablet.
His address again is: Dean Jacobs # G-30030
Wasco State Prison
P.O. Box 8800
Wasco, Ca. 93280


I wrote him a letter tonight filling him in on the jury responses and on his appeal.
He sends every one his hello's and thank you's for all the support. He sends a special greeting to Jeanne.

Sad morning

This morning, I stupidly went on the search engine on the internet to see if that OC news article was still out there about Dean asking for immediate sentencing. It was and the comments were extremely hurtful that people had made. One said that Dean should be shot right away, and another said that he is wasting the taxpayer money with his appeals and so it went. This is the exact mentality that we were fighting in Dean's trial. The jurors went in thinking he was guilty because he had been arrested and that he was supposed to prove his innocence beyond a reasonable doubt or else he would be convicted. The whole mind set was against him, instead of putting oneself in his position from an innocent standpoint. It makes me want to leave this county. There is so much more going on behind the scenes that people are not aware of. Do these same people remember how much they loved Sheriff Corona? What did he turn out to be like?
It all makes me so sad that people are so uncaring and narrow minded. There really should be more people like Jeanne the alternate juror.

A RUSH TO JUDGMENT

Hello Readers,
I am Stacy Martin, uncle of Dean. I was not allowed to attend the trial because I was a potential witness. I was never used, so I missed the whole thing. I know the whole case from family and from the first go-around. I also know Dean and am extremely close to him. I have waited a long time to blog and put my thoughts on paper. I was just too furious before. Now I am disgusted, frustrated and deeply saddened by my fellow man, the jury system and the lack of ethics by the prosecution, the detectives and our supposed great legal system!

My father, Dean’s grandfather was a prosecutor in Los Angeles. It is much harder to get a conviction in Los Angeles, because there is more distrust of the state and police by the jurors and they go into a trial with a fair and open mindset. Yet, my father was undefeated in many death penalty cases. He was tough, detailed and always searched and proved the truth, and we admired him. We are a law and order family, yet we realize that police and D.A.’s can make mistakes and be wrong in their convictions. Our father who attended much of the trial said after leaving the day of the closing arguments “if the jury comes back with GUILTY, it will be a travesty and a mockery of the justice system in Orange County.” When he heard that the jury was out for 3 hours on a month long case and their verdict, he was shocked and saddened.

HOW AND WITH WHAT EVIDENCE, MORAL CONVICTION, OR LOGIC COULD A JURY JUSTIFY THAT THEY HAD NO DOUBT AT ALL, THAT DEAN COMMITTED THIS CRIME?

It should have taken a half to full day to review the evidence and juror’s notes, and then at least another half day to discuss and try to reach a decision. A third day might be needed to get a unanimous decision. No one should have been in a hurry to get out of there on a Friday afternoon with two jurors needing to go on vacation, with some ones life in their hands.

This case is all about a RUSH TO JUDGMENT by the detectives. When they saw blood in the Blazer from Dean, his cut finger and supposed clean and then dirty tennis shoes. From the tree droppings to the bent rim the detectives felt sure they had one of the killers. It took them a month to get results back from the lab on all the smears and non-evidence from the car. The results were not what they anticipated. Dean and the Blazer had been their only focus, and now a month later, they did not want to be wrong, but they knew they needed more evidence to have a real case. You all know the rest and how they took 5-6 months to build the case and used Roy’s story as their foundation. By the third Roy interview, which was the only time that he supposedly told the truth and of course the 3-hour interview has no video, because the machine was broken. Coincidence or on purpose!! The most important testimony of the case is somehow missing, WHY?? Because this is where the detectives set up their final story that has been told over and over as one big lie!!! Look at every interview they did, where they did not lose the tape or video of the interview, and how the detectives led the informants to get them to say what they wanted to hear!! Why would an informant need to hear the story first if they know the truth!!

The biggest question for all of the jurors that WE all want to know, is how was it possible to have five people in the supposed blazer, with two of them very bloody from a horrific crime scene at night, in which they were able to clean the blazer of all of the victims and the other occupants blood, DNA and get rid of all of the fingerprints from the cars 5 occupants, yet leave visible blood stains of Dean and two finger prints of two different people that drove with Dean to a party the Saturday before the crime was committed???????????????????
THE ANSWER IS EASY AND OBVIOUS TO ALL, BUT THE JURY, THE BLAZER WAS NEVER PART OF THIS CRIME. This is the single most disgusting and disturbing item to me, that the jury did not look or think about this most important part of the entire case! Why, Why, how did they or do they explain this or was this another oversight on their part!!!! Please tell me and or explain to me how these teenagers were able to do this!! Are they Magicians and so stupid at the same time!!!

All the informants were willing to say that the Blazer was involved because they knew it was not (If proof came out about that, then maybe everyone would get off. THINK ABOUT IT!!) And if the real car was found then guess who’s DNA and fingerprints would be found on the real car used to commit the crime!!!. Plus the detectives gave all of the informants the perfect excuse by telling them that “they new the blazer was involved because Dean and the others had told them so”! (Hey if the police believe this why disagree with them) The police patrol video proves that the Blazer was not used and Willie and Ramone knew this before getting their deal. I think that they hoped Dean would get off because of that. Of course who knew that jurors would imagine a likeness of the Blazer there??? Too bad, that they did not have a fair and nonbiased mind or even normal eyesight. Gundy and the detectives knew damn well that the Blazer was not there, but how foolish does that make them look if they admit that?? THINK ABOUT IT! Why else would Gundy make a video tape copy that was all white and had ghostly images in it? SMOKE AND MIRRORS! Did you ever think, why did the DA enhance the video by whiting it so much that everything looks white in it!!

What amazes our family is how the jurors did not listen to or give much credit to testimony from normal people (who had no reason or motivation to lie) but only listened to the testimony of criminals and the prosecutors exaggerated opinions and theories of circumstances of the evidence. You see: investigators and district attorneys can intimidate criminals and instill fear in them. They do not have that same power with good citizens who have nothing to hide. A criminal will try to please the police especially if they are getting something and or are hiding something! To give or agree with the detectives and the D.A. in exchange for their freedom, that’s real motivation!!. But people like us are not intimidated to say what the prosecutor wants. We are the ones who should be listened to, not the criminals. The uniform guy, the forensic people, the videographer (who is used by the sheriff for their defense}, the plumber, the ex-mechanic, the eye-witnesses, and the character witnesses are the people who should be respected and given the most weight!!

The jurors did not take the time nor have the conscience to recognize the importance of their mission and that an innocent man’s life was at stake. They cared more about getting home for the weekend and letting two jurors make it to their vacation. It is so clear that they were made up of TV watching people who were taken in by the theatrics of the prosecutor versus the reality of the effects of their decision! The two jurors could have gone on their vacation, and then we would have had the voice of reason in that jury room of the alternate who posted on this blog. How sad!!!

As I said from the beginning, this case was a Rush To Judgment and not a SEARCH FOR THE TRUTH. The jury forgot that YOU ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN BEYOND A REASOANBLE DOUBT, NOT THE OPPOSITE, which is exactly what they have done, that is, that Dean is guilty unless he could prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is innocent. That is not what they are legally and morally supposed to do!!!

Dean, hang in there, because your family and friends will not give up on you until you are freed from this injustice and free from the system that was designed to protect the innocent from the guilty.

Stacy Martin

Off to Prison

Dean left yesterday to go to prison. His cellmate called us for him. We will not hear from Dean for about a week while he gets processed at WASCO. This is a prison where everyone goes to be assessed and to create a file on. It is then decided from there which prison and what level he will go to. There are some really terrible ones where violence and gang mentality rule the yards, but there are also ones where it is fairly safe. Most of the prisons are far away, and to visit him is a week-end ordeal. I will let all of you know more as time goes by. I will send him a money order so he can buy toiletries and extra food. From now on, 10% of all money sent to him will go to restitution for the states case. It is just another low blow.
If an appeal is granted right away, he will be brought back to Orange County. Otherwise he will be in prison for about two years while he awaits an answer on his appeal. Last time it took three and a half years.
Here is his address and cdc number for now. Dean Jacobs #G30030
Wasco State Prison
P.O. Box 8800
Wasco, Ca. 93280-8800 If you want to visit Dean, you have to fill out an application. It takes a month to get it approved, but then you are in their computer system forever as an approved visitor. When Dean sends me the application, I can e-mail it to those who want to visit.

I love Dean with all my heart. He has such a beautiful spirit and I admire his strength. I am deeply saddened by the jurors conduct. Did they even think that they had someone’s life in their hands (an innocent man)? How can they be so blind to not look at the evidence? I am so sad that my students cannot hear Dean’s story. I can just think of all the kids he could help stay away from gangs by telling his story at schools. I pray every day for Dean and hopefully one day he can speak out outside of a courtroom and help children as he has dreamed of. DEAN I BELIEVE IN YOU!!!

Love, Brittney

Jury Foreman

Hello Everyone,
Jay and I are back from our short anniversary break. We bought a new bed from The Wynn in Las Vegas. They designed their beds and the price is very reasonable. We desperately needed a comfortable bed. Happy 35th to us!
While we were away, we received a post from the jury foreman. It was a long letter and he went over each juror and what they did or did not contribute to the short deliberation. I would love to post it for everyone to read because it really shows how four men went into the jury room trying to prove the prosecutors closing arguments. The women offered nothing, and let the men lead.
The only reason that I do not post it, is for the privacy of the other jurors that he describes. If they all would okay the letter, then I can post it. I am glad that the foreman responded and gave his best description of what went on. I really believe that he does not understand how his own bias affected his deliberation. I guess it is difficult for people to look past their biases and pre-conceived stereotypes.
He made a negative comment about Dean asking to do his sentencing before the verdict was read. We have been through this before, and when 4 male sheriffs are brought in the room to stand by the defendant, we know the verdict is guilty, and they are there to prevent the defendant from running or causing a scene. Dean is intelligent, and he figured that out. What this juror does not know is that sentencing is mandatory without discretion and Dean would have to sit through another performance by Gundy at sentencing, and then listen to the victims advocate say again how he would like to kill Dean. Who wants to go through all that AGAIN! One time going through a sentencing is enough when you are innocent. The faster that he gets it over with, the sooner to start his appeal.
Andrea had a conference call with an investigator who specializes in juries, and she will be contacting the jury members to get their take on what happened. She is very nice and intelligent.
I hope the jurors will be open to her visit. I feel for Andrea in this tragedy for our family. What happened with Dean back in 1997 shaped her choice of a career. She knew that she liked the law, but seeing Dean rail roaded, made her want to save others who were innocent. She does criminal defense work, but at the federal level. She deals with FBI instead of the sheriff, and with US attornies instead of state attornies. Going through this trial has turned her off to the criminal justice system because she feels failed by every day people. What is the point of a trial when jurors do not understand jury instruction and the law? She still has the fight in her for her brother, and I only hope this does not interfere with her future happiness in life. If California was not fnancially strapped, she would start a movement for paid professional jurors. We need a new system. I have a feeling that the criminal justice student on the jury has not even taken criminal justice classes yet. If he had, he would have had a different attitude and maybe understood his job. If he really does take those classes, guilt will hit him then, about what he did to Dean. He will learn about the many innocent people that have been sent to prison because of corrupt and lazy officials. I have a degree in criminal justice and I know what awaits him in his education.

An added note

It is frustrating that the jurors are afraid to reveal themselves. They are afraid to get in trouble.
What makes them think or who made them think that anything they do or say is somehow against the law????
The judge told all of you that you can speak out as much as you want now. What fears cripple you? Even if there was jury mis- conduct, it is not against the law. NOTHING can happen to you. Something will happen to Dean though. Get some courage jurors. Talk about your experience. Enlighten us. Calls will be going out in the next few weeks from our legal representative. Please talk to him or her, and ask anything about what your fears are. After this period passes, you can never replay it. You will live with it forever.

To Jurors from a Juror

Dear jurors,

I served with you during Dean Jacobs’ trial, as an alternate. I spent the same hours in session as you did, and heard the same words. I left the courtroom last Friday, at the conclusion of my service, with the absolute knowledge that reasonable doubt had clearly been established regarding the allegations against Dean. I never even considered that you might reach a different verdict.

I had seen a huge mass of evidence and testimony that could have been interpreted in many ways. Actually, in my opinion, the arguments were convincing far beyond reasonable doubt. But even by applying just that least standard of measurement, I could not possibly know with abiding conviction that the prosecution’s representations about what took place on the night of Miguel’s murder were true.

We as randomly selected jurors had no prior knowledge of legal procedure as it would apply to this case. We were in an uncomfortable foreign environment. We tried to do what we were directed to do. We meant well. We are not bad people. But I’m haunted by the unmistakable probability that a consideration of reasonable doubt was NOT applied when the deliberations took place. It breaks my heart that I was not part of the deliberation team.

I have no personal or political agenda, beyond being deeply disturbed that the judge’s instructions were not carried out and justice was not served. Based on the anonymous comments that have been published here, it seems that others of you share my concern. Please look to your hearts, and contact the Jacobs family about your deliberation experience. It might set the wheels in motion for the declaration of a mistrial, and give Dean’s case another opportunity to be heard and decided.

If you are not comfortable about discussing this with them, request that they put you in touch with me. Just send an email to the address that can be found using the ‘Contact Information’ link in the upper left part of this page. Your name will not appear publicly here at any time unless you choose so, and you will not be facing any consequence other than peace of mind.

Respectfully,
Jeanne

Free Will and Reasonable Doubt

Many of you have expressed your anger with God because you prayed so much for the right verdict. I want to share with you my beliefs about that.
God gave each of us a free will and he promised after the big flood that he would never interfere with that again. We are each responsible for our own choices in life and these choices will be judged in eternity. However, God and his angels do try to influence our at times ridiculous choices to help lead us in the right direction. This can happen through dreams, through reading something profound, through random ideas or thoughts etc.
The jury members in Deans trial had their own free will. They made the wrong decision and did not follow jury instruction as to reasonable doubt. God will be trying to reach them in the days ahead to make them realize their error and maybe do something about it. What they do will be important for their soul.
Now as to trying to understand where the jurors were coming from: the letters that they have sent give us clues. First off, I will give you a snippet of one that others may identify with that have been on juries . "In general, it is very uncomfortable to be a juror - one finds oneself in a disturbing, completely foreign environment----and everything that adds to that sense of strangeness and unbalance interferes with one's normal abilitiy and good judgement."
She also remarked that "Isn't the prosecutor supposed to be the leader of the Good Guy Team?" These feelings alone make it very hard to go in thinking that the defendant is innocent and that there is doubt that the prosecutor really proved his guilt. When one has bias for the prosecutor, how hard is it to shift gears and think for the defendant?
Another juror wrote that "this could have been the most passive bunch of people on the planet."
Another juror wrote that she wished that there was some sort of mediator in the deliberation room with them.
I think these comments give you a better picture of what might have happened. Alot of people gave up their thinking processes to a couple of stronger more verbal jurors. If they had understood reasonable doubt, they would have been arguing for Dean and then maybe the sheep would have followed that. Who knows?
A juror wrote that she did not follow reasonable doubt, but that she is not entirely sure that Dean is innocent. This statement alone shows her complete lack of understanding of reasonable doubt. If there are any doubts at all you must acquit! It is better to err for the defendant than against him, because it is MUCH worse to send someone away for life. This juror was not supposed to say I have doubt about his innocence. She was supposed to say "I have doubts about his guilt." It is like that saying "some see the glass as half empty, and others see it as half full."
I can only hope that as Gods angels work on the jurors, they will realize that they should come forward to admit that they did not follow jury instruction. This alone could give Dean another trial and another shot at jurors who might understand their job. This action could save their souls.
On another note, Andrea and I are taking a break for four days. This has been emotionally draining so we are leaving the state. She is visiting a friend and Jay and I go to celebrate our 35th wedding anniversary. We will blog when we return.

THE DASH

I wanted to post this poem so those who are responsible for Dean being in prison will read it and think about what they did to this Innocent man and do what's right to set Dean free.....

The Dash

I read of a man who stood to speak

At the funeral of a friend.

He referred to the dates on her tombstone

From the beginning...to the end.

He noted that first came the date of her birth

And spoke of the following date with tears,

But he said what mattered most of all

Was the dash between those years.

For that dash represents all the time

That she spent alive on earth

And now only those who loved her

Know what that little line is worth.

For it matters not, how much we own,

The cars....the house...the cash.

What matters is how we live and love

And how we spend our dash.

So think about this long and hard;

Are there things you'd like to change?

For you never know how much time is left
That can still be rearranged.

If we could just slow down enough

To consider what's true and real

And always try to understand

The way other people feel.

And be less quick to anger

And show appreciation more

And love the people in our lives

Like we've never loved before.

If we treat each other with respect

And more often wear a smile,

Remembering that this special dash

Might only last a little while.

So when your eulogy is being read

With your life's actions to rehash

Would you be proud of the things they say
About how you spend your dash?

Hello to all. For those who don't know me, I am one of Andrea's friends from law school, a family friend of the Jacob's family and an ambitious supporter of Dean's innocence. I had the good fortune and opportunity to get to meet Dean on a handful of occasions during the four years that he was released between trials. When I met Dean I had no idea of the background that is the subject of this blog; to me he was just my friend's big brother. My impression of Dean at all times has been that he is a sensitive, caring and upstanding individual. Upon learning of the first trial and the allegations pending against Dean I found it unbelievable. When I learned more about the actual evidence, or lack thereof, I became even more committed to my support of Dean.
During the trial I was able to attend a single half day during the testimony of Roy. I wish that I could have been present for the entire trial but that was all that timing permitted. I must say, even as an attorney, it is eye opening sitting in the courtroom and watching the entire process unfold. You hold out this hope that the prosecutor will be an upstanding, straight forward representative of the people. Unfortunately, that was not my impression of this particular prosecutor. There was a lot of gamesmanship (and at times tantrums, which I thought was quite odd) and it was clear that winning was the only objective, regardless of the lack of evidence. There were mind games implemented where you would "see" one thing yet be told it was something else. One eye witness described to the detail the description of one of the snitches that testified (someone who looks nothing like Dean) yet the prosecution tried to say it was Dean. Saying it does not make it true. There was only one person bragging about a huge tattoo on their back during the trial and he was not wearing a suit and sitting at the defense table. Defense witnesses were treated disrespectufully if they answered a way other than what was desired. And childish tactics were implemented to try to distract the jury when the defense was trying to make a point. At one point one individual actually tried to move the podium simply so that the testifying witness would not be able to have a clear view of Andrea in the crowd. If it weren't so disgusting it would be laughable. The defense counsel did a fantastic job at trying to right some of the wrongs but it is always an uphill battle. And it seems that not all of those "wrongs" could be corrected in the presentation to the jury.
I must also say that I am aware that being a juror is a very difficult task. Trying to wrap your mind around all of the evidence, in addition to legal concepts that are new and confusing, is not intuitive to most people. It is, indeed, very challenging. Even people with years of legal training have trouble paying attention to all of the details in a lengthy trial and applying them to correct rules of law. That said, I know that a handful of jurors have contacted Tara and Andrea. It is my belief (and hope) that others have also read the blog but have not yet reached out. I encourage you to email Tara and Andrea with your thoughts, feelings and analysis. Whether you stand by your vote of guilty or are having second thoughts, there is something that lead you to this point, to reading this blog, and to having a further commitment to the outcome of the trial of Dean Jacobs rather than leaving it at the courthouse that Friday. If you have questions about the appropriate legal standard, or think that there was a misunderstanding, or felt that some jurors rushed the process because they wanted to just leave and get back to their outside lives, please contact the Jacobs family.
Dean Jacobs has touched all of our lives, either through circumstance or choice. The fight now rages on for justice. Dean has more of a network of supporters and advocates for his cause everyday and I am proud to stand among them.

Jordana

Another Juror Making Contact

Dear Tara and Andrea,

Let me begin by expressing my gratitude for your blog and your willingness to hear from us.

This morning I dreamt that Dean was sitting outside in nature within a circle of people, all of whom were holding hands and very happy. It surprised me because it was in marked contrast to the many (let's just say constant and obsessive) thoughts I have been having since the trial came to close last Friday. I started doing some research this afternoon and came across your blog. Needless to say, it was absolutely heart-wrenching to read. Your courage and strength is remarkable.

I appreciate your post about reasonable doubt and now understand that I did not apply it. I won't go into details about what we talked about in the jury room, as it looks like one of the jurors covered all the bases. I am ignorant about all things legal and did not understand/follow the instructions. Please tell me what I can do.

I hope and pray that the dream I had this morning was a vision of things to come for Dean and your whole family.

Thank you,
Anonymous Juror

Reasonable Doubt

We heard from another juror today, and we thank those that have written us. The comments are very interesting and informative. This juror seemed to not understand reasonable doubt and related that the other jurors had the same problem. I think they misunderstood the instructions as we thought. Besides that, this juror said some things that shows that he or she was not paying attention to testimony and only listened to Gundy's interpretation of the testimony. In case there are others that could benefit, we will address these issues.
The juror never mentioned the three independent eye witness testimonies and what they said. Did they forget about it? Gundy never mentioned that in his closing, so may be they did. To remind everyone: the eyewitnesses described two short cholos with baggy pants and sweatshirts (one with a baseball cap). One tall person running in a different direction.(that was Miguel) They did not see a uniform at all which is what every one says that Dean wore. The eyewitnesses described Miguel and his clothes to a tee so how could they get the others wrong???? This corroborates Dean's testimony about Willie and Raffie.
This juror said that Gustavo Rivera described someone like Dean. Again, that is what Gundy said in his closing, but it is not fact. Gustavo Rivera described a shaved head and goatee. In the line-up of suspects, he picked Johnny Roy and Willie. He described seeing the suspect days later at a liquor store. He described Johnny Roys tattoo to a tee that Roy himself revealed in court. Also, days later, Dean was violated and locked up and was not around to be seen going into a store. Gustavo Riveras testimony backs up Dean.
This juror also said that he saw the outline of the blazer in the video and no one else said different. Was everyone afraid to disagree with Gundy like in the tale of the Emperors New clothes? None of us saw the Blazer and it is our car. We found that video for the first trial and introduced it. The video expert showed all areas more up close and it became more obvious that no car was there. His whole staff never saw a Blazer. How can 12 people become so mesmerized by an actor that they are numb to what's before their own eyes? Other jurors have said something different than this one, but I guess they were not brave enough to speak up.
The jurors never mentioned the big question of why was there no victims blood in the blazer and why no suspects finger prints. This is all reasonable doubt.
Also, this juror said that he did not believe Dean's story of a bloody sneeze that would cause blood spatter. He would rather believe the made up scenario of Gundy and Dean shaking a bloody finger. Again, they did not listen to Dean's testimony but to Gundy's version of it. Dean said that he sneezed, which caused a bloody nose. He was driving and trying to stop the flow. As his hand gets bloody from that, doesn't it makes sense that he would shake the blood off and go back to trying to stop the flow? His bloody hands will touch many things in the car. He said that he had only one bloody nose that night, but then two days later had another one when driving for parts. Does the jury really think Dean is stupid enough if he was a killer, to wear a uniform that says Dean when gangbanging, and to get rid of bloody clothes, but not socks or shoes, and finally, when blood is in the car, to not totally clean it uP? COME ON!!!!!! An innocent man has nothing to hide, and acts like that. This is all reasonable doubt.
This juror also wished that there were phone records. There were at the first trial, but local calls are not listed. The juror also wondered about an alibi. (By the way, no one had one.)
Dean's father had been woken out of a dead sleep when the search happened. The officers asked him about Dean's whereabouts. He said three different things as he was trying to remember and then finally said that he could just not be certain. He did not know this search was really about a murder. He was tired and confused. The transcripts from that interview are inconclusive and so his testimony was never used. He remembers cars and customers like a computer, but anything else; his brain gets rid of. Dean did not have to prove his alibi though but Gundy still brought it up in closing which was a low blow.
Also, in Deans testimony, he said that he wore long baggy shorts, the night that the sweatshirt fell on him, not long pants. Again, Gundy mis represented the facts in closing.
This juror was very helpful, because he confirmed that the jurors only listened to Gundy's superb dramatic closing arguments and then went in and decided. They deliberated for three hours and that is not enough time to view all the things that they should have.
They can be in denial, but there will be some that can admit they got it wrong and did not apply reasonable doubt and were led by some one. Guilt will happen later, but then it might be too late to help Dean.
All of the above is what is called reasonable doubt. There was overwhelming reasonable doubt, not overwhelming evidence against Dean. But thank you juror for letting us know your thoughts. It showed us ignorance of the law and that you mainly heard only the prosecutor and that is probably from your bias going in. We hope more jurors respond.

News Flash

Unbelievably, we have heard from some jurors. What they have to say is very interesting and gives us hope. I would like to tell more, but they want to remain anonymous for now. We had no idea that this blog was being read by others besides family and friends. It has been cathartic for us to express our feelings. We want to remain healthy and holding things in is bad for ones health and well being.
We will keep this updated as our life continues. If any of you want to add comments, you can blog or e-mail Andrea at the address on the blog.

We won't stop fighting!

I was shocked to listen to the D.A. recite each witness' words as if he were repeating their testimony when in fact he was telling his own lies. Lies to fit his own story. When the witness from the uniform company was first interviewed, he was able to easily recall from his own notes on an invoice that Dean's uniform had been returned. In his own writing, he marked "RETURN" and coded the invoice for a return. Later he was interviewed by the D.A.'s office and all of the sudden he couldn't recall if the uniform had been returned. When he testified he suggested that the "return" code COULD be a "credit" code, leaving his answer vague. He claimed that the company could give a "good customer" a credit without a return. I know why he changed his testimony, it was obvious to me. If the company felt they had such a "good" customer then why did they charge them for the missing uniform to begin with and why did it take over 3 weeks for them to issue a credit? Well, the D.A. later referred to the testimony claiming that the receipt was marked with a "credit" code not a "return" code. Merely a play on words? That was NOT the testimony! I am sure the Uniform Account Rep was careful in his selection of words to avoid the truth. More disgusting was how the D.A. repeated that it was definitively a credit code, over and over he restated the testimony to his advantage with this witness as with many others that took the stand. The D.A. and his fine tuned art of testi-lying! There have been a lot of cases across the nation where cops and prosecutors are being caught in their lies.

When does "winning" become more important than the truth? There were so many lies told by the D.A. it made me ill to watch. The actual murderers that testified against Dean told so many different stories yet they were never charged with perjury. Instead, the D.A. said THIS time they were telling the truth and he knew that because he made a deal with them and if they lied then the contract or deal would become null and void. Give me a break! Well, we won't give up without a fight. WE LOVE YOU DEAN!

Contact Information

To whom it may concern:

I received some requests from individuals who would like to contact me. I do not have a problem with this. You can reach me at this email address: deanandrea08@gmail.com

Thank you all for your interest in Dean's case.

Andrea

Has healing begun?

We recently got a comment from an anonymous person which prayed for us and the victims family. She stated that maybe the victims family will start their healing. What some of you may not know is 1: Dean was friends with members of the victims family. In fact, he was almost the godfather of Miguels nephew Anthony. Dean felt very sad for Miguel and his family because he did not think that any one should be murdered or die alone. He is surprised that Miguels family and those who knew him ever believed the prosecution that he would kill Miguel, much less any one. 2. Miguels brother is now starting a trial where he is the defendant for a murder. Who knows if he is guilty or not. We no longer trust the investigators results. What is ironic is that his family now has to go through what we went through. I feel for them. This whole case has been a tragedy. I wonder how Miguels family feels that 3 of the murderers are free forever thanks to deals made by the prosecutor. May be they choose not to believe that.
I know their pain and pray for their strength. I definitely do not think any healing has begun.

Dean's Story

A snide comment that the prosecutor made has bothered quite a few people , so I will talk about it. After Dean finally got to tell his story on the record, the D.A. sneered and asked why he had never heard that story before and wow, Dean had 11 years to come up with it. Why hadn't Dean spoke of it before? First of all, Dean would have never talked to the D.A or his investigators after the treatment he got from the first trial. The first trial was so unfair, that the Orange County Apellate court overturned the verdict and said that Dean needed to have a new trial. Then, the D.A. kept delaying it, probably because his snitches were in prison. At the first trial, Dean's lawyer told him not to take the stand. He thought the lack of evidence would be suffice.
Even though the first trial was unfair in many ways, the jury still took 3 days to reach their verdict. We blamed it all on Dean not testifying. The letters in their entirety were allowed and the jurors got to understand Dean and that is state of mind was more about relationships, nature, helping people and his love of animals. This trial, Gundy stopped the letters from coming to the jury. He was allowed to take excerpts and twist them to make Dean seem violent.
Jeez, how many young boys and men have you heard say " I am going to kill that asshole, or I will drop kick him or I am going to blow him up" when they are mad. It is venting, not serious. But Gundy tried to make the jury believe that his macho talk was serious. Not allowing the rest of the letters in was terrible for Dean. This time, his new attorney said that he can testify and finally give the real truth on the record. The video tape and the eye witness testimony was not enough last time to set Dean free, so this time he told his story. For the prosecutor to demean it, and act like to the jury that it was new and contrived was another low blow. It is too bad that there are so many people in this world that so readily believe the negative before the positive.
The jury wanted to believe the prosecutor because isn't he the good guy in society? He puts away criminals. So whatever he said whether it was a lie or mis representation or exaggeration, they believed. This mentality is what we are fighting with the jury system. They can't see past their own biases. A professional jury system would make it more difficult for the prosecutors to win every case, so I think it will be a long time before we have that. Juries also do not understand the power that the D.A.'s office has. They have a large staff for homicide cases, and Gundy had numerous people doing his power points, and locating photos, witnesses, and such.
The budget is limitless. Meanwhile, most defendants canot afford an attorney with a limitless budget. A defendant cannot offer deals and money to witnesses and informants. The power is all on the prosecutors side. It is difficult for a defendant to fight that. Dean also was put in jail for his trial by an underhanded move by the D.A. . Because of this, he could not fight and help from the out side. He also could not come into court every day looking rested and clean shaven.
Dean had been out on bail for 4 years with no problems. He was looking forward to telling the truth to a jury. He still trusted people that they would not put away so lightly a man to life in prison. It is still so shocking that the proof of Dean's innocence was ignored. All the D.A really had was testimony of the informants. Nothing else supported his case. He knew that, and that's why he used every underhanded trick in the book to try and win. It worked with this shallow jury.
I know all of you in Europe are especially dismayed. We really do not have the best legal system in the world. It was designed to be great, but power and politics get in the way. I think Canada and Great Britain are way better. We are better than dictatorships though. That doesn't say much.

another comment

Just think all you potential attornies out there; if you want to be a good trial attorney, take acting classes. If both attornies are good actors, then the jury really has to decide on the evidence, not the oscar. It seems that many jurors are basically lazy and just want to agree and fawn over the best actor. It is amazing how a life was decided on acting, not evidence.
I think about that during my day. How did our society get that way? How can we change? How can we get professional jurors that understand jury instruction and the law and know not to react to dramatics? Can it happen in my lifetime? I do not think so. The people who live on the edge and associate with law breakers are in danger of ruining their lives forever. That is the lesson that Dean's case can teach. Be careful when you are young with who you associate with, because once you get in the justice system, you are doomed. Law enforcement does not care, District attornies do not care and jurors do not care. The system is a political game. How frustrating. The jurors who get out of jury duty are the ones who should be jurors. They are smart. We need jurors who understand reasonable doubt and who will represent the defendant in the jury room.

"He wouldn't be the first person to spend the rest of his life in jail for something he didn't do."

The Los Angeles Times printed a story this morning about two men being released from jail after being charged with murder in Los Angeles. The district attorney reviewed a video surveillance tape and found there were problems with his case and therefore did not feel comfortable prosecuting the men. The sister of the accused, whose name happens to be Andrea, stated her anger at the system for keeping her brother in jail for so long, but she also pointed out what I quoted above. If only the D.A. had been this righteous in our case instead of trying to change the video evidence to conform to his story.
Most people believe our justice system works and is even the best in the world. This isn't true. Hundreds of individuals have been wrongfully convicted sometimes fighting for 20 to 30 years before being exonerated. As I have posted on this blog, some of the top reasons for wrongful conviction are use of jailhouse informants and the failure of the police and prosecutor to follow-up on other leads. This is exactly what happened here. And this is why in Canada the use of jailhouse informant testimony is rarely allowed. In addition, I hope that at some point legislation will create professional jurors who consider ALL of the evidence, apply reasonable doubt, and don't decide based on feeling and conjecture. It shouldn't be that juries can be so different with the same case. Last trial the jury deliberated for 3 days and this one for 3 hours. And if Dean's case has been tried in Los Angeles, he would most likely be home with us right now.
I am disgusted with the prosecutor in this case. He has treated this case as a game (increasing the charges against Dean so he could not fight the charges while out on bail) and failed to confront the inconsistencies in his evidence. In the first trial he argued vehemently that L'Hommedieu stabbed the victim, and in this trial L'Hommedieu was safely in the backseat of the car. Now, Gundy has no qualms with giving a murderer freedom. Even though the eyewitnesses gave a description that fit L'Hommedieu. Gundy also surrounded himself with other jailhouse snitches who have former violent convictions and perjured themselves repeatedly on the witness stand. Their testimony also does not fit the physical evidence in the case, i.e. Johnny Roy's testimony that Dean had a gaping wound on his hand that was bleeding profusely through the t-shirt he had wrapped around his hand. There were no such large wound on Dean's body. But Gundy didn't care what falsehoods were testified to so long as they pointed the finger at the one remaining defendant - Dean. Gundy's unprofessionalism carried over to his treatment of the witnesses, whom he yelled at and berated when they disagreed with him, our attorney, to whom he refused to provide his witness list, and the court, to which he glared at and whined to when rulings did not go his way. Then Gundy had the audacity to claim that I was lying on the stand to protect my brother. If I thought Dean was guilty I would not support him and would surely not risk my Bar license. It was very improper for Gundy to accuse me of this and my mother is right, in the long run karma will get him.
Putting all of this anger and disappointment aside will be difficult. My family is scarred for life and we can only hope that with time the scar will fade, although it will never go away. This situation has impacted my life immensely and I hope to someday be able to educate people on the pitfalls of our justice system.
Thank you again for all of your support. Without you Dean would not be so strong. Dean has an immense faith and I will never forget his words: "No matter what happens here, I am innocent and God knows I am innocent. I am going to Heaven." Maybe in Heaven Dean will finally get the apology he deserves from Gundy, investigators Hoffman and Correa, the informants, and the jury.

The Morning after

Hello every one,
I was so exhausted, I got 4 good hours of sleep. It is hard for my brain to stop thinking of things about the trial. We talked to Dean and he is fine. He is thinking about his appeal and about what positive things that he can do in prison. He said that he just feels blessed to have discovered who he really is and to be able to tell his story on the record. Many people in life never face themselves and / or become comfortable in their own skin. Next life for him will be a great one because he is paying for any sins in this life by having to go to prison.
He told us that the prosecutor in his final closing argument which we missed, called Andrea a liar about her testimony and said that she embellished for her brother. We were shocked that one officer of the court was calling another officer of the court a liar. As we all know, Andrea does not know how to lie, and has been the most honest person that any of you have ever met. This antic and slur by the prosecutor bothered Dean, and our attorney did not even object. This is a perfect example of the low blows that the prosecutor delivers dramatically to the jury over and over.
We are hoping in our appeal to use the blatant disregard for jury instuction that the jury exhibited. They did not go through each bit of evidence to look at both explanations and then see if both were reasonable or not. The appellate attorney that we have in mind specializes in dissecting the evidence in this manner, and then goes for complete dismissal because the jury ignored the law.
For example: The eyewitness testimony. The eyewitnesses never described any one that looked like or acted like Dean. The defense says that they had the best recall because they were interviewed the next day and had nothing to gain by their testimony. The prosecution says to ignore their testimony because they only got a look for seconds. In this case, the jury should have checked a point for the defense.
The informant testimony that Dean did it. The prosecution says that it should believed because they all say similar things. The defense says that these informants had everything to gain(their freedom) and that they have proved before that they lie, and that they were led by the investigator and that they have still committed crimes since the original one. Again, the point should go to the defense.
The blazer: The prosecution says that Dean's blood is in the car because he cut himself at the crime. He says that the blazers tire scrape is from a curb near the scene. The defense says that "How can people be involved in a bloody crime and not get any of the victims blood in the car?
How can there be none of their fingerprints when the car was never cleaned. How can someone say that a tire strike happened only on one night instead of at any time during the life of the car?
Dean has always had bloody noses and having two in the four days that he had the car explains his blood there. When one does not have a tissue to stop the flow, blood gets all over your hands and hands touch steering wheels, radio controls etc. Some one who does not have anything to be guilty of does not think to clean up the blood right away. This point should have gone to the defense again.
The DNA: The DNA of the victim was in a small place on Deans shoe and on the ankle area of his sock. There was also DNA of one of the real stabbers on his shoe. The prosecution says that means Dean was at the scene and the victims blood dropped on him. The defense says that the real stabbers clothes were tossed at Dean to throw away and landed on his left foot. This explains the mixture of the two different DNA's. The point should have gone again to the defense.
The most important evidence was ignored. We have a videotape from a police vehicle that clearly shows that blazer not being at Uribes house where the informants say it is. The prosecution thinks if they keep telling the jury that they see it, the jury will believe and see it too. I guess they were right on that. Why would the defense want that video in evidence if Dean had been there? Dean was adamant that the video would show he was never there. It seems a guilty person would have said "don't use the video, it is not important."
These are the kind of things the appellate attorney will point out, and then maybe the higher court will dismiss all charges.
The jurors do not even realize how ignorant they were. They just loved the acting performance of Gundy. They were all waiting outside the court room to talk to the star of the play. It really amazes us.
Thank God, Dean is resilient and good natured. He will prevail. The jurors however have a blight on their soul now. Gundy is in denial about his true character and just relishes the limelight and the win. The investigators knew damn well that Dean was maybe innocent but did not back off. Life is ironic and not always fair. It is an adventure though and a discovery of onself. As long as we all have our health, we should be able to handle most anything. We are in eternity and just because some people get away with sin this life does not mean that they get away with it in eternity.

Three Hours

The jury came back in three hours from a month long trial with the verdict of guilty. It is shocking! They did not even go through the evidence. These jurors voted on the best performance by an attorney, the best acting, not the best case. They were all waiting for their hero out in the hall to hear how great they were and about the parts of the case they didn't know, like how Dean got his appeal, and how he was out for four years doing well and not part of any criminal acts. We come from a shallow county that cares more about themselves and their needs instead of thinking about others. They had Dean's life in their hands, and cared more about getting home than looking at the evidence seriously. Their choices have given them serious bad karma, and they will have to live with that forever. I do not think that they even looked at the video that had no blazer in it. To me, they are just as evil as the detectives and the informants. They just do not get that Gundy the prosecutor let out the real murderers to lock up one who has never hurt any one or any thing in his life in a violent manner.
Andrea sobbed in the court room as did Christine and Brittney. Dean was stoic and asked to be sentenced immediately. He got life without parole but got to keep his credits which should mean that he will be able to go to a level 3 prison instead of level 4.
Our lives will go back to semi normal and we will visit him once a month in prison. He and I had a good talk a couple of nights ago on the phone. I told him that because he adapts so well and can handle prison, I can handle it. I told him that I am grateful for his four years of freedom where he got to really find himself and family again. Now when he goes to prison, he knows who he is. I said that I was proud of him and his intelligence and candor on the stand, and that he was more intelligent than the jurors. He was happy about that and agreed that he will never forget what he learned when he was free.
We will continue the fight for Dean and we will be appealing in a few ways. God willing, he will win again. Andrea has the title for her book now that she wants to write with Dean about this experience. It will be called Three Hours. The jurors will become famous for their ignorance when it becomes a best seller.
Thank You everyone for your support and love. Life does go on, and I am sure God has a purpose for Dean in prison. At least he does not have to be in Iraq or Afghanistan. Those poor soldiers lives can be real hell.

15th Day of Trial

Today was closing arguments. The prosecutor started and went on for 3 hours. He wove a good case and was dramatic at the right moments. He fabricated and exaggerated things and he even acted like he would cry at the proper moment. He put on a slide show and power point presentation. He kept trying to convince the jury that the blazer was in the police car video when it is not. The jurors will see for themselves when they view it in deliberation. It is very important because all the informants spin their story around the blazer being there. The video shows that it is not there, which makes all the informants liars. The prosecutor also tried to say that there are too many coincidences in the case and that means Dean is guilty. He was very strong in his presentation which makes all of us nervous. We hope the jury sees through all this.
Then Jack, who is Dean's lawyer presented his last arguments. He had a good power point presentation that was based on the four informants against Dean and compared how their stories measured up to the physical evidence and eye witness evidence. Dean's story does measure up and the informants do not. Also, the Dna on Dean's shoe also has Willie's DNA on it which matches Dean's story of Willies clothes being thrown accidentally on his shoe. Jack covered the car video to the most minute detail showing the jurors where to look. He also stated how the car could never have been used. He went over the interviews by the D.A.'s investigator, and showed how he led the informants to their stories. He showed how the police early on decided it was Dean from the DNA on his shoe and then found people to agree with them. Every little thing they found like Dean's small cut, they tried to link to the case. They even used Dean's boyhood macho talk in letters to try to make jurors think that he was violent. All in All, Jack did an excellent job. His job is over now. Gundy will finish up with his rebuttal tomorrow and then the jury will deliberate, studying the evidence and trying to come to a decision.
Andrea is back from her trip which was a needed escape. She put together an outline for Jacks closing and it was sooo helpful. I cannot be there tomorrow until the afternoon, but Andrea and Christine will go. My parents, Mona, and Jae were also there. Jacks wife and son came too.
If the jury should vote guilty, we will continue the fight for Dean's innocence. Pray that the jury sees the evidence correctly. Jack explained to them that the law is: if an event has two reasonable explanations, one being the prosecution side and the other the defense side; the jury has to go with innocent. For example: the pepper tree leaves in the blazer. The prosecution says that the leaves are from the pepper tree near the murder site. The defense says that the leaves are from the parking spot of the blazer at Jays work which is under a pepper tree. Both are reasonable, so the jury must decide for the defense. That is how they are supposed to decide each event from the case. Pray pray pray!!
We will probably know tomorrow. Dean has still not been allowed to shave.

14th Day of Trial

Today was intense. The prosecutor grilled Dean for about 4 hours. He kept repeating over and over segments of letters that Dean wrote to a friend where he was acting tough and talking big.
Dean kept explaining it but the prosecutor kept repeating them like he was an actor on a movie set. He was putting on a show for the jury and Dean was the target. It was really sad for me to watch. Dean stayed calm though and held his own. They also kept mentioning his three previous arrests on his record which were all non-violent. He tried to make them seem violent.
When it was over: Dean turned to the jury and said" I swear to God I did not do this crime."". The prosecutor objected, and the judge told him that was improper, and our lawyer got mad about it and was worried that the jury would think his emotion was contrived and vote against him now. We disagreed. We think Dean was very emotional and felt like he would never have a chance to talk to the jury again, and he wanted them to know his feelings. I think this jury knew that it was heart felt.
After that, Subrina Medina was on the stand to say that Dean had lived with her family when he was younger, and that he was totally non-violent. She was a very good witness. There was also a finger print forensic man who testified that there were no fingerprints of the suspects in the blazer. The prosecutor and our lawyer bickered all day about many things and then finally decided to come to agreements on things.
The jury finally got to go down to see the Blazer, and see how hard it would be to have five guys getting in and out and not leave fingerprints or have any of the victims blood in it.
The evidence part of their case is over and the closing arguments start tomorrow. I think the jury will go into deliberation on Friday.
I cannot believe it is almost over and we will know what will happen to Dean. Not Guilty or Guilty??? My Dad says that if he gets guilty, it will be a travesty and tragedy.
Keep Dean in your prayers. He looked so sad at the end of the day.
The bailiffs are not letting him shave, so he has a dark shadow. It really makes me angry that no one cares about this. His rights are totally being violated like we are in a third world country or something. I hope they let him shave tomorrow.

13th Day of Trial

The day started with Christine, Jay's sister testifying. She stated that Dean was a very non-violent person. She was clear and concise and the prosecutor was not mean to her.
The plumber who fixed the sink testified, and the uniform rep stated that the uniforms were accounted for.
The majority of the day was Dean's testimony. All our prayers were answered. Thank You. All the angels were around him, and he spoke eloquently, clearly and sincerely. He related to the jury his life and how he got into hanging out with gangs and how different that he is now.
He admitted his mistakes, interpreted his letters of macho talk, and declared his innocence.
He told about the night of the crime and how he was woken up to help with a clothing exchange by his buddies. It was then that bloody clothes landed on his foot which he never thought about until much later. It is the only way besides a frame- up that the blood could have got on the tops of his shoes.
Now the jury knows his version of the events and the prosecutor could not poke holes into it. He will try to discredit Dean some more tomorrow. We could not have asked for Dean to be any better. It is thanks to all the prayers. God is listening. Keep it up!

12th Day Of Trial

Today was a packed witness day. The defense started with another eyewitness to the crime that again stated that no one like Dean committed the crime, and certainly no one with a uniform on. The prosecutor as usual was quite mean to him, but the witness stuck to his story.
Then a former mechanic at our shop testified about the sharp edged sink that cut every ones fingers until it was fixed. He also totally forgot that Dean had uniforms and uniform shoes which was shocking to me but peoples memories are selective. We had a break and I asked him if he really didn't remember that. He said he didn't. He had told our attorney before today something very different. Strange.
Next, we had our friend Brittney testify to Dean's character. She was very calm and a good witness. Next, we had on a second pathologist for the prosecution, but he did not prove very good either way about Dean's cut. Then, we had the videographers who explained and showed us how the prosecutions tape is a jumbled mess with added images and ghosts. We then looked at a better vidoe that clearly shows the Blazer is not where the informants say it is. Of course the prosecutor was mean again but the witness stayed calm and strong in his assertions.
Our defense attorney then asked the judge if we could take a field trip to the apartments where the Blazer was supposedly parked after the crime. The judge said no, but is thinking about letting the jury go down to the courthouse street and see the Blazer and how small the inside is to fit 5 people and have no fingerprints of any suspects except Dean inside. The judge is still deciding on that.
Then I went on the stand. I was asked about Deans time with us before the crime, and the rules of the house, and about his uniforms and shoes, and his work schedule and the night of the search. I answered everything truthfully and the prosecutor wasn't very mean with me.
Then, Mona went on the stand.(Dean's aunt) She testified how there was no way Dean would ever be violent. She was very calm and thought carefully on each question before answering.
She was a good witness. Christine will go on tomorrow to talk about Dean's character and what kind of employee he was.
That was it for today. I think it went fairly well, except that I wish our attorney would ask more questions to his witnesses.
Tomorrow will probably be Dean's testimony. Every one pray that he remains calm. He gets so nervous, and then his brain jumps all over the place. I hope to see my parents there.
Until tomorrow! Pray pray pray