Over the past year or so, I’ve featured a number of updates on various Orange County and South Bay legal cases from an anonymous source.
Like the updates I get from Dj Wheels, I’ve come to trust and rely on the insights from this source to keep us up to date on cases from behind the Orange Curtain, which can be hard to follow from up here in L.A. — especially since these cases seldom make the news unless something major happens.
Today she sent me an email offering background information on a couple of cases that are slowly moving through the system. And I thought it was good enough that I wanted to share it with you.
This article from the Sunday Orange County Register shows why the OCDA’s office wants to nail Michael Dennis Roach (and his ilk) so bad. (Roach is the drunken racer on PCH who hit another drunken racer, spinning both cars onto a segregated beach path.) Things do not look good for Roach. His co-defendent Glenn Michael Moore, on the other hand, has a much shorter rap sheet and a terrifyingly good lawyer.
Our drunk-driving laws are nauseating liberal. MADD had to fight for years to get that excessively high .08 limit, and it’s so easy to circumvent in court. In other, more civilized countries with a better grasp of public safety and/or neurochemistry, the limit is much lower, and the penalties are more appropriate. Every year in America alone, more people are killed by drunk drivers than by firearms, knives, blunt objects, & strangulation combined, and drivers under the “legal” limit (but at .04 or above) account for 25% of these deaths. Our laws fail to address the severity of the repercussions of dangerous operation of motor vehicles.
Danae Miller (um, for example) had a preliminary hearing on December 1st and naturally the judge decided that there is indeed enough evidence to send her to trial. Miller’s due to be arraigned in a few hours; I won’t be there because both Anita Sue “Stop Signs Don’t Apply to Me” Cherry and Adam Carl “Just a Witness” Garrett have appearances at a different couthouse. However, an incredibly wonderful MADD victim services specialist assisting the Britel family will forward me the plea and any details.
Miller’s preliminary hearing was tedious, thorough and heart-rending. The D.A. called four individuals to testify; the defense called none. The hearing included some of the evidence that will be shown if Miller doesn’t just plead guilty like Hines, including the video from the dashboard-mounted camera of the first responding officer’s approach to the scene, which showed Britel’s shattered carbon fiber bike lying in the gutter, front light still blinking.
Although it was dusk, the view of the roadway was completely unobstructed, the streetlights were on, and the bike had plenty of reflective material on the rims and below the seat. Britel was wearing a yellow dayglo jacket with reflective material. A blind man could have seen him. Miller could not.
Evidence also included the dozen or so texts & calls made in the minutes preceding the collision, as well as Miller’s ratty ancient-tech flip phone, which she’d handed over to the first responding officer at his request after stating that she never texts while driving. Two prior citations to which she pleaded guilty refute this remark. Disappointingly, a Verizon custodian of records testified that there’s no record of the content of the texts sent or received.
Miller also initally lied to the police on scene about her intake of alcohol. With bloodshot eyes and slurred speech, she first claimed she’d had nothing to drink prior to driving. She then changed her story, saying she’d had “one glass” of wine about an hour prior to leaving work. However, her BAC was measured at .105 and .106 from two separate vials of her blood collected approximately an hour and forty-five minutes after the collision. (This amount was rounded down to .10.)
In questioning the D.A.’s theory of culpability, the judge requested a brief review of testimony in order to determine whether, as Miller’s lawyer attempted to suggest, the incident was a simple SWSS. But Miller had never told investigators, “I saw the cyclist ahead.” She admitted to the arresting officer that the first indication she had that she’d hit something was the shards of her shattered windshield hitting her arm. (At least she wasn’t too drunk to wonder what all the sparkly stuff was.)
After the hearing, I asked D.A. Hayashida whether Britel had a bike computer and whether the data had been accessed. To my surprise, she admitted she didn’t know (!!!) but would look into it. I’d squinted at the pics & video of Britel’s mangled bike, but could only see a dark blur to the left of the areo bars. It just strikes me as unlikely that a serious, competetive cyclist wouldn’t have the bells and whistles that could pinpoint the location, sudden deceleration & trajectory of his bike… and possibly even indicate the exact time, to the second, when his heart stopped beating.
Incidently, Hayashida is also assigned to prosecute Adam Carl Garrett, so I expect to see her again today. AND (refer back to the Orange County Register article) she’s the one who nailed Dennis Malavasi.
Mad props to good stranger Heather Lohrman (hope that’s spelled right), who stopped at the crime scene, attempted to find Britel’s pulse, and ran up to Miller’s car to get the license plate number in case the perp decided to flee. Another good stranger was present as well but his name was not released.
Just a quick and irrelevant note about Anita Sue Cherry: Last month, only two days before her most recent scheduled hearing, her first lawyer (whose list of traffic citations is longer than Cherry’s) was cited for failure to stop at a stop sign. And next Monday, her most recently retained lawyer (her first lawyer’s legal partner) has his arraignment for the DUI w/property damage he got in September.
I swear to God I’m not making this up.
Laugh, or cry?