According to an AP story today, Deputy District Attorney Craig Hum said during his opening statement that Brown killed Lauren because he didn't want to pay about $1,000 a month in child support.
Defense attorney Pat Harris countered that it was an accident when the girl fell from Inspiration Point in Rancho Palos Verdes.
(snipped)
Hum portrayed Brown as an uncaring father who tried to shirk his parental responsibility at nearly ever turn. After Brown learned the girl's mother, Sarah Key-Marer, was pregnant with Lauren, he sought a paternity test that eventually proved he was the father, Hum said.
(snipped)
Harris gave a different account of his client's relationship with his daughter, insisting the case was nothing more than "character assassination." He dismissed the prosecution's contention that it was a "good-versus-evil" struggle between Brown and Key-Marer.
~~~
Pretty much staying with the first trial. We'll see if any other articles give more details.
17 comments:
I stay subscribed to this blog via bloglines since the last trial, thank you for the update.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/07/27/national/main5192588.shtml
The prosecution's first witness was Key-Marer, a British immigrant, who described her relationship with Brown as amicable but deteriorated during the child custody dispute after she said in court documents that he was showing little interest in Lauren's life.
Key-Marer testified that her daughter wouldn't share what she did with Brown and Lauren was upset the day she died once she learned Brown would pick her up at school.
"She said, 'No, no I don't want to see him today,"' Key-Marer said. "She was crying and I had trouble getting her out of the car seat."
In a wrenching moment, Key-Marer said after talking to her daughter on the phone she decided to leave work early and pick up Lauren. But she soon learned that Brown had arrived early and she wouldn't be able to get there in time.
She described waiting for Lauren that night, looking out her window for her daughter and Brown to return. Distraught, she and her husband decided to notify authorities because they thought Brown may have kidnapped Lauren.
"We knew something really bad had happened," she said.
Key-Marer broke into tears when she recounted how a female police detective told her that her daughter had died.
"I remember hearing the words 'cliff' and 'Lauren was dead,"' Key-Marer said before court recessed for the day. "I just couldn't believe it."
~~~
Please hang in there Sarah. ((((hugs))))
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_12927034
Latest from Daily Breeze - Denise Nix.
http://www.dailybreeze.com/news/ci_12927034
Denise Nix covering first day of trial (link above).
New jury consists of 10 men, 2 women.
Sarah, in a pre-trial interview:
"I've been waiting so long to have any kind of closure or any kind of peace," she said.
~~
Peace to you Sarah.
The blog wars have already started. Posting as "impartiality" (kind of like Faux News claiming that they are "fair and balanced"), the Round Mound of Unsound Arguments posted the following missives on the Daily Breeze fora:
This is really biased reporting...maybe the girl slipped off the cliff. Who knows. I do blame the media for always jumping on cases and screaming guilt because it makes a jucier story. The American people deserve fairness not tabloid reporting.
This one is a dead giveaway:
That was by Hayes, Craig Hum's expert...you know it took Hum a lot of time and a lot of money to say that on the stand...Hayes also tried to defy Newton's third law of gravity on the stand...I don't think he's exactly reliable...
The defense's argument, in one sentence:
Just I guess what I want to tell you people is, keep an open mind and heart. Cam was a surfer dude, maybe not the brightest bulb, yes irresponsible, but a killer? Not everyone is guilty.
A lie is the telltale sign of the Kaldis:
This isn't good reporting at all. With all due respect, Ms. Nix is completely biased. Maybe she was sleeping during the defenses opening statement because the only facts in this article are those of the prosecution.
My God...I don't side with either the defense or the prosecution, but I think the readers of this publication deserve to hear both sides of the story. Yes there are two sides to every story and good reporters show both equally.
Here's what happened in court:
If you were in the courtroom, you are either a true crime junkie like Sprocket (who would have posted her views on her blog), or someone with a dog in the hunt.
Another telling tale:
Though this first testimony sounds damning, take it with a grain of salt. Ms. Marer did not like Mr. Brown prior to Lauren's death and is (rightfully so) angry that she died on his watch (either by accident or intent). She is doing anything to make him sound evil. Many of her stories were just recently remembered, in fact one was just remembered a few weeks ago (9 years after it would have occured). Her stories have no witnesses. They could have occured, they could have not.
Yes, it really is that obvious.
No bias there! Ha!
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/Retrial-Begins-for-Man-Accused-of-Throwing-Daughter-Off-Cliff.html
NBC Los Angeles has a story.
You know, Sarah isn't the only witness to Cameron's behavior. Remember, he didn't even call Sarah when Lauren died. She had to find out when he didn't bring her home that night at 7pm. He had every opportunity to call her and he didn't. He couldn't man up even for that.
It doesn't really matter if Sarah "disliked" Mr. Brown, or that they fought in front of Lauren, or that Brown undermined Sarah, or that Patty had voodoo parephernalia under her bed, or that Brown and Patty had money or didn't have money, or that Sarah was an immigrant, or that Brown bought Lauren a big doll.
What will matter is the science - the injuries Lauren sustained in the fall will demonstrate she was thrown, not that she tripped and fell and had to have rolled down. If Brown doesn't take the stand in his own defense, he is toast.
Basically, this is a rerun of Peterson: he couldn't have done it, he loved his wife, he had all sorts of excuses for his behavior (there's no playbook for grief, remember), but it all boiled down to the forensics - where the body was found, how the body was found, and that he was at the scene where the body was found.
It's a pretty open and shut case. These desperate attempts to paint the prosecution as having blinders on or conspiring to convict this nobody baggage handler are simply the same tired canards Geragos & Co. use in every murder defense.
Loretta: It's a pretty open and shut case.
At the outset, for the benefit of new readers, no one here will ever accuse me of carrying a brief for the Kook Kaldis Klan.
I said it from the outset six years ago, and will say it again: This is a very close case. The science doesn't mean all that much if you don't know for certain and cannot ascertain where Lauren was (allegedly) thrown.
A lot will depend on what comes in and what doesn't, which is why the defense was willing to wait three years for the (more liberal, gay) judge (we all know what Ted thinks of "poofters") of their choice.
The KKK's conspiracy theories are never going to be heard in court. Occam's Razor applies, but only to a point: the jury must unanimously be convinced of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. That was what tripped up the last jury, and it might do so here, as well.
All over the world! This time, it's more brutal:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25848491-5012748,00.html
http://breakingnews.iol.ie/news/world/father-threw-girl-off-cliff-to-avoid-child-support-420437.html
http://story.argentinastar.com/index.php/ct/9/cid/c08dd24cec417021/id/524015/cs/1/
The blogs are predictably savage:
http://boozeworthy.com/2009/07/28/more-bad-parenting/
http://startelegram.typepad.com/crime_time/2009/07/prosecutor-man-tossed-daughter-off-cliff-to-avoid-child-support.html
http://www.mockpaperscissors.com/?p=21523
http://hopelens.wordpress.com/2009/07/28/following/
http://sdubsoundoff.blogspot.com/2009/07/wtf-moment-of-daybad-parent-of-day.html
This one is called "The Hum's Real World News" -- no, I'm not making it up! http://www.neowin.net/forum/index.php?s=4ae3bfe95546b38b4f738090cad4928d&showtopic=803172
The best reporting will probably come from Sprocket.
I have an entire notebook full of notes covering today's testimony and observations. It's doubtful that I will get started on them tonight since I was up quite late last night sewing and I'm exhausted. So expect some delay in my coverage of this case.
Several members of the mainstream press showed up: South bay area paper, the Daily Breeze sent reporter Denise Nix, who covered the first trial at the Torrance Courthouse in 2006. City News sent a reporter for the morning session and another, Terri Keith for the afternoon. A reporter from the Associated Press and a rep from the Los Angeles Times was also in attendance in the afternoon session, so there might be mainstream articles up on the web by this evening.
Best comeback: "'... the prosecution is going to present him (Brown) as a monster; they have to.' The reason they have to is because he is a monster, and to portray him as anything less would be dishonest."
The very first line on Google BlogSearch: Related Blogs: Cameron Brown Trial - http://cameron-brown.blogspot.com/
I'll ask again, Ted: Why is this blog invisible to the search engines? If you intend to compete on the stage of ideas, you actually have to show up.
Ken..actually, and correct me if I am wrong, the entire previous jury beieved Brown to be quilty, but could not agree on what count(s)to convict him on. May not be open and shut, but I think his attorney has a long, uphill battle. No doubt he was a lousy parent, but that is not proof of quilt. I remember talking my children on many hikes, even island hikes, and NO WAY were they going to get near the edge of a cliff. Yes, people do slip and fall, but the forensics in this case are strong, strong enough to have the first jury believe he was involved.
So, we will wait and see.
The gang's all here, "Impartiality." Veteran trial-watcher Sprocket observed:
"Several members of the mainstream press showed up: South bay area paper, the Daily Breeze sent reporter Denise Nix, who covered the first trial at the Torrance Courthouse in 2006. City News sent a reporter for the morning session and another, Terri Keith for the afternoon. A reporter from the Associated Press and a rep from the Los Angeles Times was also in attendance in the afternoon session, so there might be mainstream articles up on the web by this evening.
Several individuals who appeared to be friends of the victim's mother, Sarah, were in the gallery. Brown's wife Patty was also in the gallery."
Sarah's friends were there. Don't think they'd be complaining about the coverage. Then, there were a smattering of professional reporters. No reason to complain about the press there.
"Impartiality" claimed to be there, and the only remaining candidate appears to be Patty Kaldis Brown.
I wonder why the case is getting so much more coverage this time around. Is it just because there are more blogs out there? There seem to be more actual news stories, as well.
Jes: Ken..actually, and correct me if I am wrong, the entire previous jury beieved Brown to be quilty, but could not agree on what count(s)to convict him on.
At this point, the CA equivalent of involuntary manslaughter seems like about as close as you will ever see to a gimme ... but juries are funny things, and to be found guilty on a charge of involuntary manslaughter is to be found guilty of a fit of legally unforgivable stupidity.
Given that he has already served six years, the only charge that is going to matter is murder one or two.
There is a lot of new interest in this case, and rather than reiterating all the background, new readers are encouraged to reference the archives, especially July 2007:
http://cameron-brown.blogspot.com/2009_07_01_archive.html
~~~~~~~
I'm waiting for any update on today's testimony. There won't be much available for several hours.
Lots of articles about the trial (yesterday's story) all over the world.
KCAL video in new entry ^^^
Loretta resized it for me.
Post a Comment