Category: Pre-Trial

The Sacramento County Superior Court issued a press release with details on how to attend the hearing as a member of the general public, how to stream the hearing on YouTube, and the health precautions that will be enforced. Click here to view it.

 

Update: Court appearances in the Golden State Killer case are set to resume on June 29th, 2020.

The April 22nd, 2020 hearing was cancelled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The defense was set to argue their position that the alleged crimes committed outside of Sacramento County cannot be tried in a Sacramento County courtroom. This discussion will likely take place at a later date.

The court still has the May 12th, 2020 scheduled in their calendar system (this was the date that the preliminary trial was set to begin), but we have unconfirmed information that the preliminary hearings have been moved to July (Update: The next scheduled court date is confirmed to be June 29th, 2020. A new time frame for the preliminary hearings might be set on that date). Since the May 12th booking is listed in Department 09 instead of Department 61, it appears to be a residual date from the earlier schedule.

A large number of witnesses, due to their age or health status, are particularly vulnerable to COVID-19. There may be further delays in the schedule due to the risks inherent in face-to-face hearings. Several cases around the country have proceeded through video conferencing, but it’s unknown if this technology will be used in the Golden State Killer case.

Last month, 421 Sacramento County inmates were released to help mitigate the spread of COVID-19. DeAngelo was not among them. Social visitations and public access to the jail have been halted until at least April 30th.  No outbreaks of the virus have been reported at the Sacramento County Main Jail where DeAngelo is housed, but a deputy public defender tested positive three weeks ago after visiting with an inmate.

Watch the entire hearing. Video posted by KCRA Channel 3 (an NBC affiliate in Sacramento, CA).

On Thursday, March 12th, 2020, the defense team for Joseph James DeAngelo, Jr. fought to prevent the prosecution from obtaining more DNA samples from their client. The District Attorney requested more samples last month, but the defense was successful in blocking the motion until it could be debated in court.

The DA wanted each county with interest in prosecuting DeAngelo to have their own samples on file. It’s assumed that this will not only help with testimony scheduled to be delivered at the preliminary hearings by expert witnesses, but it could aid the counties in any additional tests and investigations into the Golden State Killer crimes series.

The judge ended up ruling that the counties which did not have a DNA sample of DeAngelo on file could obtain it from his person.

As KCRA reports in an article by Hope Miller, another hearing will take place on April 27th, 2020 (Note: it appears that this has been moved to April 22nd) to discuss the constitutionality of trying DeAngelo in Sacramento for alleged crimes that occurred in other counties. In a recent court filing, the defense lays out a forty-page argument against the prosecution’s rationale for combining the charges into a Sacramento-based trial. This hasn’t been discussed in court at-length in two years of status conferences, so it’ll be interesting to hear how the prosecution responds and how the judge rules.

Paige St. John, a reporter at the LA Times, was the first to report on a footnote on one of the pages of the same motion filed by the defense. The footnote indicates that DeAngelo may be willing to plead guilty to an unspecified number of charges in order to get the death penalty taken off the table. News outlets have been reporting that victims have received a letter from the defense with an offer to make their feelings about a guilty plea known to a third-party intermediary. It’s not yet known how, when, or if the details of a plea bargain may be worked out.

The preliminary hearings in this case are still scheduled to begin on May 12th, 2020. The preliminary hearings will consist of close to 200 witnesses testifying over a period of several weeks. The judge will determine if the evidence presented is sufficient to warrant the commencement of a full trial on the 13 murders and 13 kidnapping/robberies that DeAngelo has been charged with.

As first revealed in this article by the Sacramento Bee’s Sam Stanton and Darrell Smith, prosecutors met on Friday (January 17th) with the defense team for the accused Golden State Killer, Joseph James DeAngelo. At the meeting, prosecutors informed the defense that they planned on asking the judge at Wednesday’s scheduled hearing to set a date for preliminary hearings in the case.

The preliminary hearing phase is the next step for DeAngelo in the court system. During the preliminary hearings, the prosecution will make its case for why DeAngelo should be indicted for 26 crimes and he should stand trial.

Stanton and Smith’s article also describes a subsequent request by the defense team for a delay, quoting the defense’s paperwork as stating “If forced to set a preliminary hearing date at this time, the defense will be unable to provide competent and effective representation for Mr. DeAngelo.”

Sacramento Superior Court Judge Steve White responded on Tuesday, the day before the scheduled hearing. He informed both parties that they could present their arguments regarding a date for the preliminary hearings at the scheduled hearing on Wednesday, January 22nd.

At 1:35 PM PST on Wednesday, January 22nd, 2020, Joseph James DeAngelo appeared in Sacramento County Superior Court before Judge Steve White. This makes the third judge DeAngelo has appeared before (the previous two were Judge Michael Sweet and Judge Michael G. Bowman).

This was the public’s first glimpse of DeAngelo since August 2019. DeAngelo has grown noticeably thinner since his first court appearance in 2018. A recent article by LA Times writer Paige St. John estimated his weight to be 135 lbs. He was listed at 205 lbs. in April 2018 at his booking.

Sonseeahray Tonsall with Fox40 was first to post updates and photographs from today’s court hearing. At 2:00 PM she summarized the first few minutes of the hearing in a tweet: “Prosecutors going after accused #eastarearapist DeAngelo tell judge it’s not the victims’/investigators’ fault DeAngelo chose to go on a prolific crime spree generating lots of docs & evidence in multiple counties, creating a lot of material for them to review.”

Tonsall went on to report that the defense requested that the preliminary hearings begin at the end of the year and quoted Judge White as calling that request “unreasonable.”

After further discussion, the preliminary hearings were set to begin on May 12th, 2020. The prosecution will begin calling witnesses and presenting its case with the goal of testing the sufficiency of the evidence. This will be a lengthy series of hearings with the majority of the evidence being presented and testimony from over 100 witnesses. If the case against DeAngelo is deemed to have merit, the court will begin scheduling his actual trial.

Also newsworthy was today’s story by CBS13 detailing efforts to obtain the police reports written by Joseph DeAngelo while he was a police officer. Since the identification and arrest, it’s been alleged that DeAngelo committed crimes as the “East Area Rapist” while working as an Auburn police officer from 1976 to 1979. Parsing through this substantial amount of paperwork will create an approximate timeline of DeAngelo’s whereabouts during these years.

Joseph James DeAngelo appeared in Sacramento County Superior Court today, Thursday, August 22nd, 2019, at 1:35 PM PST for another Settlement Conference. The purpose of these Settlement Conferences is to give the prosecution and the defense an opportunity to discuss any issues, the case’s progress, and to allow either side to discuss or file a motion. Judge Michael G. Bowman presided over the hearing. Several survivors of EAR/GSK assaults and members of the EAR/GSK Proboards were in attendance.

A 600-acre fire near Shasta College and jury deliberations in a high-profile California voter fraud case prevented the hearing from being a prominent part of the news cycle, though there was little action in the courtroom today. The event lasted no more than two minutes, with no major motions or discussion topics put forth. According to the Sacramento Bee, DeAngelo’s attorney Diane Howard made a few remarks outside of the courtroom, one of which was a confirmation that she’s received discovery materials. Receiving and reviewing discovery materials is an essential step that must take place before the preliminary hearings can begin.

The next court date is set for January 22nd, 2020 at 1:35 PM PST.

A video of the hearing can be viewed at the Sacramento Bee’s website (link).

 

Joseph James DeAngelo is due to appear in Sacramento Superior Court today, Wednesday, April 10th, 2019, at 1:35 PM PST. Judge Michael G. Bowman is now presiding over the case, as Judge Sweet has rotated to the appellate court.

It should be noted that this hearing takes place nearly one year after DeAngelo’s arrest on April 24th, 2018.

All of the district attorneys  with murder charges against DeAngelo were represented in court.

The defense again noted their objection to the use of electronic media to televise and cover the courtroom proceedings, claiming that it could affect DeAngelo’s right to a fair trial. Judge Turner noted the objection but kept his ruling in like with Judge Sweet’s and allowed the cameras to stay.

A protective order was mentioned in passing, but details weren’t discussed.

In a move that’s already causing quite a bit of controversy, four of the five district attorney offices informed DeAngelo that should he be convicted of the homicide charges and their special circumstances, they would be seeking the death penalty against him. Tulare County is the only capital case that is not as of yet seeking the death penalty.

Insiders have been discussing the political climate in California and how that could affect a death penalty case like DeAngelo’s. California recently issued a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty. In the years leading up to the moratorium, they’d already ceased executions (for all intents and purposes). In the current political climate, some insiders are worried about the jury pool ramifications that death penalty cases can face. Some cases, due to a juror’s evolving stance on the death penalty as trials commence, have resulted in a hung jury. In that event, parts of the lengthy process could start over. Despite the controversy, most insiders seem confident that the death penalty is the right move, as it leaves all of the prosecutor’s bargaining chips on the table at this early stage and ups the ante toward a possible plea bargain offer or entering of a plea.

The hearing lasted about five minutes. The next one is set for August 22nd, 2019, at 1:35 PM in Sacramento.

Joseph James DeAngelo appeared in Sacramento Superior Court today (Thursday, December 6th, 2018) before Judge Michael Sweet at 1:30 PM local time.

The primary purpose of today’s hearing was a progress check and an attempt to resolve the issue of whether DeAngelo should have to hire a private defense attorney or whether he’d continue to work with the public defenders that had been assigned to him back in April 2018. This discussion came on the heels of several meetings held a few days prior, including discussion and estimation by the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors that the county-funded prosecution and defense of DeAngelo could cost $20 million or higher. It’s unknown at this point if funds from other counties, the state, or if federal funds will be made available to this case. Several other counties brought charges against DeAngelo, and the FBI helped investigate the case from 2016 to 2018, so it’s possible that other jurisdictions will help shoulder the financial burden.

Judge Sweet reviewed some of the arguments and details related to what  DeAngelo’s financial responsibility to the court should be, and he ruled that DeAngelo may keep his public defenders. Depending on how the proceedings play out, DeAngelo may have to reimburse the court at a later date, and it’s been noted before that his personal assets may be at stake in civil matters or in other future actions.

Judge Sweet also addressed previous requests by the defense to ban media coverage of the trial. The judge noted  that there’s national and international interest in this case, and that he didn’t believe that media coverage would affect DeAngelo’s right to a fair trial.

Another open issue is the defense’s prior objection to capital punishment. That issue wasn’t discussed at this hearing.

The compilation and delivery of discovery documents to the defense team is an ongoing process. DeAngelo’s next court date has been scheduled for April 10th, 2019 — nearly one year after his arrest.

Joseph James DeAngelo appeared in Sacramento Superior Court today before Judge Michael Sweet. DeAngelo’s predicament became much more severe, as he was arraigned on a total of thirteen counts of murder (many with special enhancements) and thirteen counts of kidnapping with intent to commit robbery.

There were extra guards at the courthouse today, presumably because of the high profile of this case and because so many officials from so many different jurisdictions were in attendance.

DeAngelo appeared in the courtroom, standing of his own volition (unlike the first few appearances where he was confined to a wheelchair). He heard the charges against him, and did not enter a plea.

Before the court appearance today, it was announced that the prosecution will not be seeking indictment by grand jury, but instead will be presenting evidence at a series of preliminary hearings. A grand jury phase is usually “secret” in the sense that the defendant isn’t part of the process — he/she is simply informed of the results. During a preliminary hearing, the prosecution will present evidence and witnesses to the defense, who will then be offered a chance to cross-examine.

Several district attorneys involved in the case were present in the courtroom today, and members of the public were allowed to attend. In the gallery were several survivors, family members, and witnesses who will be participating in the upcoming series of preliminary hearings. Clearly very distressed and emotional during the hearing, many of them gave interviews to the media at the conclusion of court business.

To summarize the homicide charges against DeAngelo, he’s accused of the following:

1) The September 11th, 1975 murder of Claude Snelling in Visalia, California (part of Tulare County).

2) The February 2nd, 1978 murder of Katie Maggiore in Sacramento.

3) The February 2nd, 1978 murder of Brian Maggiore in Sacramento.

4) The December 30th, 1979 murder of Debra Alexandria Manning in Santa Barbara County. Special circumstances attached to this charge include murder during the commission or attempted commission of rape and murder during commission of burglary.

5) The December 30th, 1979 murder of Robert Offerman in Santa Barbara County. This charge carries with it the enhancement of murder during the commission of burglary.

6) The July 27th, 1981 murder of Cheri Domingo in Santa Barbara county. Murder during commission of rape and murder during commission of burglary is added to this charge.

7) The July 27th, 1981 murder of Greg Sanchez in Santa Barbara County, along with the special circumstance of murder during commission of burglary.

8) The March 1980 murder of Charlene Smith in Ventura County, along with the special enhancement of murder during commission of rape and murder during commission of burglary.

9) The March 1980 murder of Lyman Smith in Ventura, along with murder during commission of burglary.

10) The August 21st, 1980 murder of Patrice Harrington in Orange County. Special circumstances include murder during commission of rape and murder during commission of burglary.

11) The August 21st, 1980 murder of Keith Harrington in Orange County, enhanced by murder during commission of burglary.

12) The February 6th, 1981 murder of Manuela Witthuhn in Orange County, along with the special circumstances of murder during commission of rape, murder during commission of burglary, and murder during commission of robbery.

13) The May 5th, 1986 murder of Janelle Cruz in Orange County, along with the special circumstance of murder during commission of rape and murder during commission of burglary.

In addition, a special circumstance of “multiple murder” has been added to the previous charges that occurred in Northern and Southern California.

Joseph James DeAngelo’s next thirteen counts are kidnapping with intent to rob. They include:

14) EAR Attack #4 on September 4th, 1976, which took place on Crestview Drive in Carmichael. A twenty-nine-year-old was doing her laundry alone at her parents house when the EAR punched her, broke her nose, dragged her into the house, and sexually assaulted her. At the end of what was one of his most brutal assaults in the history of his crimes, he stole her car and abandoned it a quarter mile away from the scene.

15) EAR Attack #16 on April 2nd, 1977, which took place on Richdale Way in Orangevale. This was the first known assault on couples in the GSK series. As was typical of his attacks on couples, he left the male victim bound in the bedroom and moved the female to the living room. Up until this attack, he’d been targeting lone women or groups of women. It’s the movement of the woman through the house, in addition to the money stolen, that triggers the “kidnap to rob” charge.

16) EAR Attack #17 on April 15th, 1977, which took place on Cherrelyn Way in Carmichael. In an attack very similar to the previous one, the EAR moved the female victim and stole items from the house.

17) EAR Attack #18 on May 3rd, 1977, which took place on La Riviera Drive, Sacramento. Again, the attack was very similar to the other EAR attacks on couples.

18) EAR Attack #20 on May 14th, 1977, which took place on Merlindale Drive in Citrus Heights.

19) EAR Attack #21 on May 17th, 1977, which took place on Sandbar Circle in Carmichael. This is the one where the “Italian family” was attacked. The man had stood up at the community meeting several months before.

20) EAR Attack #22 on May 28th, 1977, which took place on 4th Parkway in South Sacramento.

21) EAR Attack #24 on October 1st, 1977, which took place on Tuolumne Drive in Sacramento. This is the attack discussed by the male victim, Victor Hayes, in a recent article and video.

22) EAR Attack #25 on October 21st, 1977, which took place on Golden Run Avenue in Foothill Farms.

23) EAR Attack #37 on October 7th, 1978, which took place on Belann Court in Concord. This was the first attack in Contra Costa County.

24) EAR Attack #38 on October 13th, 1978, which took place on Ryan Road in Concord.

25) A DNA-connected attack. This was EAR Attack #39, which took place on October 28th, 1978 on Montclair Place.

26) Another DNA-connected attack. This was EAR Attack #46, which took place on June 11th, 1979 on Allegheny Drive in Danville.

In addition to the kidnapping to commit robbery charge, it’s also alleged that DeAngelo used a firearm as a control weapon in those cases.

No further business was conducted today, other than the prosecution suggesting an inquiry as to whether DeAngelo could afford his own attorneys or if he has to stick with public defenders. The defense has also indicated that they object to capital punishment, and intend to discuss that with the court at a future date.

The next court date is slated for December 6th, 2018, though that’s subject to change.

On Tuesday, August 21st, 2018 at 11:00 AM, a coalition of District Attorneys appeared together to issue statements to the press.

Presenting together were Contra Costa County District Attorney Diana Becton, Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, Sacramento County District Attorney Anne Marie Schubert, Santa Barbara County District Attorney Joyce E. Dudley, Tulare County District Attorney Tim Ward, Ventura County District Attorney Gregory D. Totten, and Lisa Bartlett, Supervisor of the 5th District (where the Orange County murders took place).

This group of officials is in charge of prosecuting the case against Joseph James DeAngelo, the alleged Golden State Killer. Thus far, DeAngelo had been charged with thirteen murders.

The subject of the press conference was kept under wraps until it began, though speculation was that Contra Costa County had possibility figured out a way to charge DeAngelo for some of the many rapes and crimes he’s suspected of committing in that county. Paul Holes, an investigator who worked the case for over twenty years and who was instrumental in solving it, worked for Contra Costa County and it’s natural that the DA there would seek charges if possible.

Another possible subject was a change of venue for the trial.

The press conference took place in the Law Library on the first floor at the Orange County District Attorney’s office.

Rackauckas began by introducing his colleagues and making general statements about the case — the most effective of which was calling DeAngelo a “human predator.” He told the press that the District Attorneys from all jurisdictions had been meeting together and working out the best way to manage the case, with the goal of figuring out where the trial should be held. He explained that based on the location and complexity of the crimes, as well as the convenience and hardship to the various witnesses that would be called, they determined that the trial should take place in Sacramento. As Anne Marie Schubert said later on, it “began in Sacramento,” and it would “end in Sacramento.”

An amended complaint was filed at 10:00 AM this morning in Sacramento Superior Court that geographically pins the venue down in Sacramento.

Ventura County DA Totten spoke next, and discussed the “generational impact” of the case. He explained that the pooling of charges and resources into Sacramento shows that the prosecutors are “unified,” and that it serves the case and serves justice in the best possible way.

Santa Barbara DA Dudley spoke, mentioning that they want to take the case to trial as soon as possible and that everyone who suffered “needs this to end.” She felt that the move of her charges to Sacramento was the best opportunity for a “single, comprehensive, speedy trial.”

Tulare County DA Tim Ward spoke next, expressing his confidence in this process. He talked about the “successful and amazing” collaboration as it related to his case.

Dinah Becton, District Attorney of Contra Costa County, took the podium next to announce that she was filing charges related to four separate cases in her county against DeAngelo. The charges are four felony counts of kidnapping to commit robbery, with sentencing enhancements for personal use of a firearm and personal use of a knife. These crimes took place between October 7, 1978, and June 11, 1979. Becton explained that two of those cases involve DNA hits. My own understanding is that three of them do, but perhaps there’s something that excludes the third one.

The Sacramento County DA, Anne Marie Schubert, spoke next. She too announced new charges for DeAngelo, namely nine felony counts of kidnapping to commit robbery, with sentencing enhancements for personal use of a firearm and personal use of a knife. The crimes took place between September 4th, 1976, and October 21st, 1977.

She later explained that because “rape” had a short statute of limitations, neither she nor DA Becton could prosecute DeAngelo for it, despite rape being one his primary offenses.

She also gave some history about the Task Force, and announced that DeAngelo would be arraigned on these new and consolidated charges at 1:30 PM in Sacramento.

Lisa Bartlett, Orange County Supervisor of the 5th District spoke. She mentioned that her home city is Dana Point, where the Harringtons were murdered by the Golden State Killer.

When the press conference turned to questions, the team was asked if there were any additional charges coming or if there were any additional crimes DeAngelo was suspected of. Rackaukas answered that they’ve filed everything they can file as of right now, but investigation may turn up other cases. They’re looking carefully at other cases, but so far none have emerged as being definitively tied to DeAngelo.

The strength of the DNA evidence was questioned, and the team assured the press that the storage, analysis, and precedent for prosecutions similar to this case (from a DNA-standpoint) don’t seem to present any problems.

The death penalty was discussed, and DA Totten said that 10 of the 13 murders are death penalty eligible. They all “have and use a very solemn process” when evaluating a death penalty case. That decision point is still in the future. DeAngelo’s background, as well as various “aggravating and mitigating circumstances” in the crimes will help inform whether this should be a death penalty case.

The team was asked why only nine of the Sacramento cases were being charged, and how they could be prosecuted if there wasn’t any DNA. DA Schubert told the press that “signature MO” elements tie the cases together, and that she was unable to prosecute him for all of the suspected rapes because “kidnap for rape” isn’t something that she can reach back and prosecute him for, but she CAN reach back and get him for “kidnap for robbery.”

The team commented on their outreach to victims and how they’re in constant contact with survivors and loved ones of those who were murdered. The victims as a whole have expressed “tremendous gratitude” to Law Enforcement.

It was also noted that it’s unprecedented for so many District Attorneys from so many different offices to get together and prosecute a case like this.

The jailhouse informant scandal in Orange County was brought up by one of the reporters, and Rackauckas answered that the scandal had nothing to do with moving the prosecution of all cases to Sacramento.

When it comes to the speed of the trial, DA Schubert mentioned that they were trying to move as quickly as possible, especially with so many witnesses on the older end of the age spectrum. She’ll be swearing in some additional lawyers from other jurisdictions to help participate in this case, and the coalitions of District Attorneys will decide on a day-to-day and hearing-by-hearing basis about who will be located in Sacramento to assist with the case. She mentioned that DeAngelo himself can speed it up by entering a plea, if he so chooses.

We’ll find out if he does on Thursday at 1:30 PM, though he’s not expected to.

On Monday, August 13th, 2018, Tulare County Sheriff’s Office held a press conference to announce that they will be charging Joseph DeAngelo, the alleged Golden State Killer, for September 11th, 1975 murder of Claude Snelling.

Snelling was shot to death while stopping a masked intruder from kidnapping his daughter. Ballistics evidence from the bullets used to shoot Snelling were matched to a gun stolen by the Visalia Ransacker in late August 1975.

It’s unknown at this time when or where DeAngelo may be tried for this crime, as other jurisdictions and counties are lining up to prosecute him for twelve other murders. He’s been appearing in Sacramento County court since his arrest on April 24th, 2018.

At the press conference, Jason Salazar, Chief of Police of the Visalia PD spoke about the basics of the case (including the burglaries, the modus operandi, and the timeframe). He detailed the Snelling case for which DeAngelo is being charged, and he also detailed an incident where the Ransacker shot at a police officer.

Little known fact that didn’t come up at the press conference — Salazar’s father was one of the original investigators on the Visalia Ransacker case.

Salazar emphasized that there’s no DNA in the Snelling case, but there’s other physical evidence, strong modus operandi links, and witnesses.

Tim Ward, Tulare County District Attorney, spoke next. He announced that today he filed first degree murder charges against DeAngelo, thus taking the first step toward “providing justice not only for the victim’s family, but for the community as a whole.”

With no DNA in the case, he told the press that science and DNA played less of a role in the Visalia cases — it was good old-fashioned police work.

He spent time thanking the other jurisdictions for their help and partnership.

The DA explained that the reason that the burglaries, kidnappings, and attempted murder of McGowen aren’t being prosecuted is because they’re past the statute of limitations. Out of the 102 crimes that are officially attributed to the VR, the Snelling murder is the only one they can prosecute.

Chief Salazar emphasized that the Snelling murder is the only one they’re investigating as being committed by DeAngelo, dashing many hopes that the 1974 murder of Jennifer Armour may be mentioned in the press release or even the 1975 murder of Donna Richmond.

The team doesn’t know yet when he’ll be arraigned or what the next step will be — a lot of it will depend on the Sacramento District Attorney’s office and the other jurisdictions that are investigating the case.

When asked again about the physical evidence, Salazar informed the press that the gun used to kill Snelling has never been found, but that the modus operandi link between the Visalia Ransacker and Golden State Killer cases is very strong and that the ballistic information tying the Snelling crimes to the VR series is also a strong link. He mentioned that there is additional physical evidence that he’s not willing to discuss yet at this time.

Salazar also mentioned that he’s not aware of any sexual assaults committed by DeAngelo in his jurisdiction during the VR phase.

Comprehensive information about the Visalia Ransacker case and its ties to the Golden State Killer case can be found in our book, Secret Origin of the Golden State Killer: Visalia Ransacker (link).

Details about the Snelling murder can be read online at http://www.visaliaransacker.com/snelling.php