• CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US

  • Home
  • News
    • News Main Page
    • NewsFlash
  • A&E
    • A&E Main Page
    • Movie Times
    • TV Listings
    • A&E Blog
    • Art Galleries
    • Best Bets
  • Opinion
    • Opinion Main Page
    • Columns
    • Voices
    • Letters
    • In Memoriam
    • Obituaries
  • Events
    • Today
    • Search
    • Submit
    • Best Bets
  • Living
    • Living Main Page
    • Outdoors
    • Travel
    • Sports
    • Peeps
  • Food & Drink
    • Food & Drink Main Page
    • All Restaurants
    • Delivery
    • All Bars & Clubs
    • Drink Specials
    • Open Now
  • Outdoors
    • Outdoors Main Page
    • Outside Insider
    • Spotlight On
    • Features
  • Classifieds
    • Real Estate
    • Jobs
    • Autos
  • Personals
  • Obits

Paul Wellman

Detectives find knife in trash can.


Attorneys Give Opening Arguments in Juarez Gang Murder Trial

Knifing Not Gang Related, and Another Teen Struck the Fatal Blow, Defense Claims


Thursday, August 7, 2008
By Caitlin Crandell (Contact)
Article Tools
Print friendly
E-mail story
Contact an Editor
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us. del.icio.us.
Digg! Digg!
furl furl
google google
newsvine newsvine
reddit reddit
technorati technorati
Facebook Facebook
Yahoo! My Web 2.0 Yahoo!

As the trial of 15-year-old Ricardo Juarez commenced, on August 6 in the courtroom of Judge Brian Hill, prosecutor Hilary Dozer described his opening argument as a “roadmap” of the events leading to the murder of Luis Angel Linares in spring of 2007. Senior Deputy District Attorney Dozer emphasized the premeditation of the Eastside gang, of which Juarez is a member, as they prepared, on March 13, to converge on State Street the following day and “bang for the Eastside.” Linares, who lived on the Westside of town, was 15 years old when he died in the March 14 melee. Juarez, standing trial for murder as an adult, was 14.

Luis Angel Linares
Click to enlarge photo

Luis Angel Linares

The jury, composed of 11 women and five men, of whom one woman and three men are alternates, was told by Dozer of a “perfect storm” of young people gathering on State Street, shortly after noon when school let out, early, for staff meetings. With the help of evidence photos, Dozer emphasized the violent intentions of the Eastside Traviesos, the younger auxiliary of the Eastside gang to which he said Juarez belonged. He showed “the big one”--the knife that Juarez used--along with bottles, bats, and sharpened stakes also found at the crime scene. “The defendant was prepared to kill with the big one,” said Dozer, “and planned to kill anyone from the Westside.”

Dozer said the Eastsiders involved in the fight belonged to a criminal gang whose primary activity is “assaultive behavior.” With the help of MySpace photos, which defense co-counsel Jennifer Archer attempted to remove from the body of acceptable evidence, the prosecutor placed defendant Ricardo Juarez in the midst of this gang culture, showing him clad in the gang’s preferred blue with groups of other gang members who were, like Juarez, also displaying the hand signs for Eastside. There was also a photo of Juarez alone, wearing black gloves that Dozer explained were worn to mask evidence of a fight including wounds and blood. Before the jury came into the room, Archer argued that not only were the photographs from an anonymous source, but they also could have been altered digitally to remove or add people to the image. Judge Brian Hill allowed the photos with the understanding that prosecutor Hilary Dozer would reveal the identity of their source during the course of the trial.

D.A. Hilary Dozer
Click to enlarge photo

Paul Wellman

D.A. Hilary Dozer

Dozer gave his version of events using slang such as “homies” and what he characterized as gang monikers for the defendant and others involved in the fight (Juarez is called “Lil Thief” and the victim “Nacho”), in what seemed like an attempt to portray the Eastside gang to the jury in vivid and startling detail. The prosecutor physically demonstrated several parts of the action. He told the jury about how Juarez ran across State Street with his “big one” drawn, and slashed at the victim, Luis Linares, who was standing on the corner of State and Carrillo Streets in front of Saks Fifth Avenue. Dozer showed how Linares reportedly fell down, crab walked away from Juarez, and got up to run away, exposing his back, where he would receive the fatal blow, though the prosecutor did admit that the forensic team could not chronologically sequence the seven wounds ultimately found on Linares’s body.

Dozer quoted a segment in which Juarez reportedly told Jose, “They [the police] already know everything. They knew it was me.”

Dozer closed by bringing up one of the more problematic, yet important, pieces of evidence in the trial: the “Whisper Tapes.” The “Whisper Tapes” is a video recording of a whispered conversation, which lasted several hours, between Ricardo Juarez and fellow Eastsider Jose M. while the two were in a police station holding room. Because the conversation is whispered, the tapes are difficult to understand and interpret. Dozer quoted a segment in which Juarez reportedly told Jose, “They [the police] already know everything. They knew it was me.” He quoted Juarez later telling his friend that he had seen blood coming out of the victim’s mouth, something that Dozer explained would only happen had Linares sustained an injury, like the fatal one, which would cause severe internal bleeding. Finally, Dozer closed his argument with a quote that he seemed to hope would convince the jury of Juarez’s intent to murder:

Jose M.: “Do you think doing this for the Eastside is worth it?”

Juarez: “It would have been if I hadn’t been caught.”

The defense co-counsel, Deputy Public Defender Jennifer Archer, began her opening argument by addressing the jury directly, saying she wanted to start by “acknowledging you, acknowledging your challenges,” and saying that the jury would have to “reconcile some very difficult truths.” She continued by saying that she was not presenting a “roadmap” as prosecutor Dozer had, but a story for which her opening argument would be the “outline.”

“You haven’t heard the half of it,” Archer pointed out as she displayed a photo of a boy on the overhead projector. This boy was not Ricardo Juarez, but Ricardo Romero, Archer explained, another person to play a role in this “story with a complicated plot and vulnerable characters.” Also, it was a story with two main characters sharing the same name: Several times Archer used “Ricardo” to refer to Juarez or Romero, and had to be reminded by the judge to use last names.

Archer retold the events of March 14, emphasizing Linares’s role as an active rather than a passive one. “He was courting trouble and violence,” said Archer, describing Linares on State Street that day with his bicycle, and pointing out that when Juarez ran at him with a knife, he did not ride away, but chose to stay.

Archer continued by painting a new side of Juarez to the jury, the more sympathetic side, the side that prosecutor Dozer had neglected to share. According to Archer, Juarez was not really a trouble-maker, he was a young person in love, and he was called “L’il Thief” merely in reference to his cousin who was called “Thief.” With this new characterization of Juarez in mind, Archer introduced the second Ricardo, also called “Stomper,” into her narrative. Archer told the story of how Stomper also came to State Street that day, wearing his “costume” of Eastside blue with black gloves, like Juarez’s, and how he escaped whereas Juarez was caught.

“This is the story of an investigation,” Archer added, promising to illuminate for the jury mistakes and assumptions made by the police who were involved in apprehending the young people and collecting the evidence at State and Carillo Streets that day. Archer warned the jury that local police officers would say that this was a gang crime, but that the jury members must “use extra caution” on this point because the defense intends to prove that the Eastsiders were "not a gang" under the definition of the penal code, and that in any case Juarez did not act with specific intent to benefit a gang.

State and Carrillo streets, the scene of the tragic events that unfolded that day.
Click to enlarge photo

Paul Wellman

State and Carrillo streets, the scene of the tragic events that unfolded that day.

Archer explained that Juarez had received phone calls saying his girlfriend had been spat on and pushed that day on State Street. Archer pointed out that the Westsiders had been throwing rocks on the afternoon of March 14, and that when Juarez ran across the street, waving his “prop” (the knife), he was doing so with “drama” and “bravado” in defense of his girlfriend. Archer told the story of how Juarez was showing courage and bravery as he confronted and chased Westsider Linares, but his fear got the best of him and he fled.

This is where Ricardo Juarez’s story ended, and Ricardo Romero’s (or Stomper’s) story began, according to Archer. In the back parking lot of Saks, Stomper stabbed Linares in the part of his back where the coroner later identified the fatal wound, according to several witnesses, Archer claimed, adding that “the evidence will show Stomper killed Linares.” Stomper got away, shed his gloves that had Linares’s blood on them, and gave them to a friend to be stashed. He went to the Eastside Boys and Girls Club and told someone he had just killed another boy. Of all the witnesses to the events that took place in the back parking lot of Saks where Linares was found dead, none of them identified Juarez, emphasized Archer.

Archer told the jury that they have to “find [Juarez] responsible for what he is responsible for,” not what other alleged gang members are responsible for.

The defense promised to prove that, while Juarez is responsible for several “superficial” and non-life threatening wounds on Linares, he was not the one to give the lethal blow. According to the forensics team, had Juarez dealt Linares the fatal blow on State Street, it would have taken “a Hurculean effort” to run the way Linares was seen running from the front to the back of Saks. Archer told the jury that they have to “find [Juarez] responsible for what he is responsible for,” not what other alleged gang members are responsible for. Also bringing up the “Whisper Tapes,” Archer also pointed out parts of the conversation different from those that Dozer picked. Archer described a part of the tape in which Jose M. told Jose, “Stomper got Nacho,” while gesticulating to the part of his back where Linares received the fatal stab wound. Archer closed by telling the jury, “you are the resolution of the crisis” of this story.

Having concluded the opening arguments, prosecutor Dozer examined his first witness, Officer Christopher Zbinden, the policeman who was the first to the scene and responsible for breaking up much of the fight. Deputy Public Defender Karen Atkins began her cross examination, but did not have time to finish. The trail is scheduled to resume court on Friday, August 8 at 9:30 a.m.

Related Links

  • Juarez to Stand Trial
  • Former Eastside Gang Member Testifies at Juarez Hearing
  • Juarez Hearing Begins
Story Help (Click-ability)
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.

Comments

Discussion Guidelines

It looks like Dozer is trying to railroad Juarez. In these high profile cases, it is more important for the DA's office to prosecute someone (even if they are not guilty) rather than do the hard work of finding the truth. Shame on you DA's office.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2008 at 11:27 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Seriously Herschel Greenspan? You read an article about the opening statements in a murder trial and you have deduced that the defendant is being railroaded. That may be one of the most ignorant comments I have ever read. Feel free to keep an open mind until all the evidence has been presented by both sides.

johnny123 (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2008 at 2:45 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No, seriously johhny123. I have been following this case from the start and there are many reasons for my opinion. My opinion is actually very well informed. Your comment on my comment is the ignorant one because you assume that I formed my opinion based on this one article. Do you have an opinion on this case or are you one of those people who can only put together a comment as a knee jerk reaction to an actual opinion?

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2008 at 3:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Following the case from the start is not the same as reviewing all of the evidence which hasn't been open for review. Are you saying that you're not supposed to prosecute because the person may not be guilty? Is that what you're saying Hershey? That my friend is what DA's do. The Judge and Jury are to determine guilt not you, based on your "informed" opinion before the trial even begins!

AShaw (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2008 at 5:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Herschel Greenspan"... you're a joke !!!
well you obvoiusly dont know much and your talking out of your a**!
In case you dont know the media has a 1st amendment right that in my opinion allows them to publish any lie/bullsh** they want ! If anything i know way more than you because ive been to most if not all rickys court proceedings!!
Im really updated with all the facts and evidence in this case and just for your information juarez didnt inflict the fatal wound stomper (ricardo romero) did they most likely got mixed up becasue both of their names are ricardo !
well anyways face the truth it wasnt him and you know it im just waiting for when the time comes when you feel real stupid for being predjudice and judgemental towards him!!
so get your sh** straight!

mhrndz (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2008 at 5:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ashawey,
You are confused. The DA has a responsibility to only prosecute those that they think are guilty. That is basic. Again another post from someone without a thought in his head except to take exception with my OPINION.

mhrndz,
Wow I must have touched a raw nerve. Is the gangster Ricardo Romero a friend or family member? If so I feel sorry for your situation. In case you are confused, this is a place for commentary. I have my opinions and you have yours. I am confused by your point. You said:" just for your information juarez didnt inflict the fatal wound stomper (ricardo romero) did they most likely got mixed up becasue both of their names are ricardo !"
I think that we are in agreement on that point.

You seem to be unable to express yours without using foul language. If you are someone close to some of the defendants in this case, perhaps you should try to be a positive role model for them by watching your rage. In addition, I think that you might want to use punctuation marks in your next post, it makes for better reading.

Herschel_Greenspan (anonymous profile)
August 8, 2008 at 6:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Herschel, So you have been "following" this case. Oh well excuse me, I had no idea. I guess we don't need evidence presented to a jury because good ol Herschel has been "following" the case. Let's just excuse the jury on this case and have you make the call. Look, you are intitled to your opinon, but that doesn't make it an informed one. A trial by jury in America is still the best way to determine criminal liability. In any event, it doesn't even matter who the stabber was if the stabber was in the same group as Juarez. My understanding is that it is like a get away driver in a bank robbery that can be charged with murder if someone in the bank is killed. You go as a group somewhere to committ crime, you are liable for all your associates actions. I am not sure if that is the same thing here, but I think it is. You may not agree with that, but if that is the law, then I don't think it matters who the stabber was. In any event, let's just trust our jury system to make the right decision.

johnny123 (anonymous profile)
August 9, 2008 at 7:32 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I submit then, Hershey, that they probably think he is guilty. They have more access to information than you do. Why would they attempt a costly prosecution if they don't think they can win? Just to be mean? Just because you don't think he is guilty, doesn't mean that the DA doesn't. or that he is innocent.. Let's not prosecute anyone because they might be innocent, it's too mean. Is that what you want? Or let's just all be positive role models and not use swear words and use proper punctuation and then there will be no more crime on the planet. After all it's all our fault you know, that people are bad. We haven't given them enough love and understanding and set a good enough example . Good Lord...just keep giving criminals excuses - that is sure to turn them around as they laugh at you for being such a sap.

AShaw (anonymous profile)
August 14, 2008 at 6:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Post a comment

Username:
Password: (Forgotten your password?)

Comment:

EVENT CALENDAR

Previous Month | Next Month

Today's Events Best Bets Submit an Event

Local Weather

Currently:
Mist
Temperature:
55.9°
Wind:
5 NE

Surf Report
  • Specials
  • InPrint
  • Top Emails
  • Blue Green Guide 2008
  • Summer Camp Guide 2008
  • Wedding Guide 2008
  • SBIFF 2008 All Access
  • 2008 Election Coverage
  • Best of Reader's Poll 2007
  • Calendar of Fundraisers
  • Local Bands
  • Kid's Mother's Day Issue
  • Made in Santa Barbara
  • Tea Fire 2008
  • The Brief but Violent Life of the Tea Fire
  • Nonprofit Steps in When County Stops Sea Sampling
  • Homeless to Move Along
  • Anti-Gang Action in Santa Barbara
  • Little Dragon Makes Big Return to Santa Barbara
  • Westmont Soccer Scores Big Despite Being Burned Out of House and Home
  1. Tea Fire Cause Is Determined
  2. Dear Prop. 8 Supporters
  3. The Unusual History of the Tea Fire’s Point of Origin
  4. Goats to the Rescue
  5. The Tea Fire Devastates the Bohemia of Mountain Drive
  6. Green Building Techniques Save Home on Mountain Drive
  • CREATE AN ACCOUNT
  • LOG.IN
  • CONTENTS
  • CLASSIFIEDS
  • ARCHIVE
  • INFO | ADVERTISING | CONTACT US
Google
 
Independent.com Web
Copyright ©2008 Santa Barbara Independent, Inc. Reproduction of material from any Independent.com pages without written permission is strictly prohibited. If you believe an Independent.com user or any material appearing on Independent.com is copyrighted material used without proper permission, please click here.
This is our Privacy Policy.