Inspiration Point"Today, jurors in the Cameron Brown murder re-trial visited five spots along the Rancho Palos Verdes cliff that figured prominently in the case. Basically, as they did during Brown's first trial three years ago, they retraced the purported path Brown and his daughter, Lauren Sarene Key, took before her fatal plunge on Nov. 8, 2000.
"They went to the Abalone Cove parking lot, the nursery school on the beach, up to Portugese Point, to Inspiration Point and ended at the archery range where Brown said he laid little Lauren's body after he fished her out of the surf.
"Brown, wearing jeans, a blue button-down shirt and handcuffs hidden by a sweater, accompanied the jury to the first three locations, but not the last two. I don't know why."
She plans to attend tomorrow's closing arguments.
42 comments:
Oh and BTW, their expert was Gunter Siegmund (CI & Sprocket both spelled it wrong) and he's a whiplash expert that does studies for car accidents. He's with the firm MEA Forensic.
Sprocket reported that Cam wasn't going to go to the cliff this time. I wonder why there was a change of plan. Do they take him so that jurors can see him in situ, so to speak, and look for some sort of reaction?
Jessica Brothers was called a liar by Team Cam/CI when she said Cameron said he sat by a bush on flat rock.
Sprocket has a picture of the end of IP of a bush and flat rocks. Interesting.
Harris must have told him it might not look good to the jury if he didn't go. But then he didn't go out on IP or the archery range but I'm sure his peeps have a reasonable reason for that (insert sarcasm icon here).
Yeah, I see the bush in most of the pictures too, the bush they say doesn't exist (its true the whole aspect of the place changes from angle to angle- now you see it, now you don't). Also, what could be this rock in some of the pics too, maybe older pics. And, isn't there more than one person who interviewed him that said he mentioned sitting on that rock? Not just Brothers- they make much of this rock NOT existing, like she would cheerfully dream this rock up just to hang Brown, she even mentions seeing it herself. I know that the park people made changes up there to make it safer, after the fact; maybe removing that was one? So as not to encourage people to linger there. What they really could use is a zoom-lens video camera trained on that place at all times... I'm sure he was told not to go out to those other places to avoid the "painful memories"...
Sprocket's photos are great.
Why didn't Cam go to IP or the archery range? Probably to avoid the looks he'd have gotten from the jury members. Unlike the Kooks that are supporting him, most of the jury members would likely be shocked at how dangerous and impossible it seems to anyone with half a brain that it was a really dumb place to take a 4-yr old.
Even a budding Olympic athlete, scuba diving, fast-ball-pitching, rock hurling, marathon sprinting 4-yr old
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gPBYc1x2QINgpr-GmU59h1S69PUAD9AO3FG80
Prosecutor says Calif. dad threw child from cliff
By GREG RISLING (AP) – 3 hours ago
LOS ANGELES — A former airline baggage handler threw his 4-year-old daughter off a cliff because he didn't want to pay child support, a prosecutor told jurors Tuesday during an impassioned closing argument in the man's murder trial.
Deputy District Attorney Craig Hum urged jurors to find Cameron Brown, 47, guilty of first-degree murder in the November 2000 death of Lauren Sarene Key.
Hum reviewed the evidence for more than two hours, contending it was no accident that Lauren fell 120 feet from Inspiration Point in Rancho Palos Verdes.
"It brings us to one horrifying, inescapable conclusion," Hum said. "This man threw his 4-year-old daughter off a cliff to her death."
(snipped)
Defense attorney Pat Harris said the child slipped and fell, and that Brown was a loving father who wanted to spend more time with his daughter. He said Brown kept a picture of his daughter by his bedside and continued to pay child support after Lauren's death.
He added the prosecution's case was replete with holes and didn't prove that Brown had killed Lauren.
"This is not by any stretch, based on the evidence, a murder case," Harris said. "Please base your decision on the evidence and not on emotion."
(snipped)
"Nasty, vindictive and spiteful," Hum said of Brown, who sat stonefaced watching the prosecutor.
Hum repeatedly called Brown a liar, saying the defendant had given varying accounts to investigators about what had happened in the moments before Lauren died. Lauren's physical injuries weren't consistent with the defense contention the girl had accidentally fallen, the prosecutor said.
In addition, no children's footprints were found near the edge of the cliff, only adult-sized imprints, Hum said.
"She didn't fall off. She was thrown," Hum said.
(snipped)
"There is no way the defendant's story is true," Hum exhorted. "No way. She was 4!"
(snipped)
Jurors will begin deliberations on Thursday. All state courts are closed Wednesday because of a furlough.
http://www.insidesocal.com/crime&courts/
Denise Nix is blogging about closing arguments. She has Parts I & II up and working on Part III (and...?).
Scroll down ...
He's toast.
I'll be so relieved when this is over.
Just got through reading the Nix 1 & 2- thanks for the head's up on that! What a thorough-going Rat Bastard he is! Above and beyond questions of guilt or innocence; his vindictiveness is so ugly- I'd forgotten about his treatment of Sarah AFTER the event. How can his supporters, who seem to be earnestly committed to a position of innocence- how can they possibly excuse his horrid behavior? "If you only knew what we know", is all they say about anything. His small, sadistic cruelties, now well-documented, they don't address at all. Trying to get her fired, deported, the "bad breath" bullsh#t comment on the video, the phone calls, on and on. Rat Bastard!
BTW, whatever did happen to the pro-Cam "witness" who Geragos made so much of in opening in Cam 1- the one he said would claim Rat Bastard pleaded with Lauren's body, "Don't die! Don't die!"- the witness who never materializes with actual testimony, either then or now? Anyone know anything about that? I can't seem to locate anything beyond Geragos' attempt to verbally materialize this scene for the jury...
When I read about him mocking her and pretending not to hear her on the phone I want to punch him in the face. Doesn't sound like a grieving parent to me, more like a selfish, heartless,immature a**hole.
Please jury get it right!!!!
From Hum's closing rebuttal at the first trial:
The defendant’s lawyer didn’t deliver what he promised in opening statements. Where’s the Don’t Die Guy? If the defendant’s lawyer wants to bring witnesses or evidence that we don’t—we aren’t hiding anything—they are free to bring it themselves. Nothing stopped them from doing that.
Geragos had accused Hum of hiding witnesses that could bolster Cameron Brown's side of the story.
Since the defendant's team didn't provide any information on their case witnesses (except their expert during the case in chief in one entry) I don't know if Harris brought the "Don't Die Guy" to the stand this time around. Perhaps Denise Nix will address this when she blogs about closing arguments by Harris.
I'm assuming a lull of sorts during deliberations. As I can, I will go through transcripts, etc. of the various proceedings- this trial, Cam 1 and GJ, and sift through, and see if I can "line up" his various statements, compared to other witness statements (understanding not everything was or could be placed before this particular jury- like him, for instance!). If something lines up in favor for him, so be it. But I've been reading as much as I can, and either he is: A) a guilty liar (that he's at least a liar has already been manifestly proven anyway), or B) a (as my son would say) GINORMOUS conspiracy has been afoot involving literally dozens of other people both in LE and others just off-the-beach, so to speak.
We DO know that he/his minions refuse to take down the Jon H. "support" letter from their site- that is just unethical. He tried to turn Lauren against her own mother- that makes him Evil Rat Bastard, First Class. He audibly chuckled during the 9-1-1 call, commenting to the beach-goers (that they should put something on)- that makes him abnormally (psychopathically?) detached- (Hey, Dudes- sh#t happens!). Overdrawn 31 times on his account- that makes him, well, Dud Dude! Wife wants small child (he clearly does not- look at those awkward pics they use- he could be at the dentist's!)- that makes him a Hinky Dude with a motive.
Part 3 of Denise Nix' commentary is up:
http://www.insidesocal.com/crime&courts/2009/09/from-the-cutting-room-floor-ca-2.html#more
And over at the other blog, CI is calling for 'Anna from Whittier' who allegedly posted on the Daily Breeze site to contact Pat Harris, with some comment about how prosecutors and investigators didn't follow up on things, essentially.
I can't find anything on the Breeze site from an Anna from Whittier (relative to Denise's stories, at least, unless I'm missing something) - does anyone else know what she's talking about?
No idea either, on "Anna"- I tried to search their site using "Anna" and "Anna From Whittier", and all sorts of permutations- Nothing came up that could possibly be it (Anna Nicole doesn't count). Went looking about on other possible pages and searched again. Nope. They wouldn't COMPLETELY make up stuff like that (like, you know, possible witnesses)?!? Or would they?
I read Anna from Whittier's comment yesterday or the day before. It was in response to Denise Nix's posting on 9/15. She claimed that she saw Lauren running ahead of Brown and that she seemed happy. She also claimed that she attemtped to contact authorties to provide this info but that they did not call her back.
Just read Nix 3 (part 1)- Lauren hadn't even had her lunch yet- he takes her early from school and doesn't even get her a Happy Meal, or carrots, even. Oh, that's right- he's probably over-drawn on the account! But, couldn't he have just stopped a minute at the playground area for her to just get something into her tum? Nope- not the Rat Bastard!
Not only was she hungry, but he claims she played on the playground for 20 minutes, so she had already used up some scant fuel doing that. Then, she walks a mile and a half?
It's a stretch.
How or why would "Daily Breeze" poof a comment from "Anna in Whittier"? Where was it listed, and Omama, can you pull it up today?
Karen - There were many comments posted in response to her article (I seem to remember around 19 or so)Almost all were very critical of Brown except for hers. There were a few commenters urging her to contact the authorities. It's not that Anna's comment was poofed the entire comments section is gone.
I can't get to the 9/15 entry, now - it just brings up a blank page for me (http://www.dailybreeze.com/ci_13345635?source=rv)
Weird.
But someone comes forward 9 years later and says she saw Lauren happily running in front of Cam that day? When we know she spent the whole day crying and hadn't eaten and had no water, and a bunch of OTHER witnesses say otherwise. Yeah. (And if the case is to the jury, what difference would it make to the case if this woman came forward NOW? She says no one ever called her back - but she didn't think to contact defense attorneys?) I'm not buying it.
Agree. Anna from Whittier is likely a member of Team Cam.
I just read Part 3 of commentary from Denise Nix. There was one entry that really shocked me.
•A defense witness said he saw Brown guiding Lauren up the trail as she struggled on all fours to get to Inspriation Point. "She didn't want to go up there. He directed her up there." The witness said "something's not right" to himself.
I don't remember hearing anything about this witness. Does anyone have any insight?
I don't remember that one either, Omama - but that is really, really harsh testimony - and if she's *crawling* out on to the point, how are they going to believe that she then ran out to the end and started throwing rocks?
Here's the link to Anna's comment, scroll about halfway down, #9.
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/avalon-ca/TRRUPPC6837D5CNS3
The end of Part 3 & Part 4 are up.
http://www.insidesocal.com/crime&courts/
Anonymous- how did you know how to link to that captured "Anna" comment, and we can't find it when we searched? So, are you "Anony" or "Anna"?
Also, folks, didn't Geragos in Cam 1 say that he had a witness he would present who would state that she had seen Lauren in front of Cam, and that witness never materializes, anymore than "don't die" man does? So, if Geragos had that person, than that person was, in fact, contacted back by the authorities who did then forward the info to the (then) defense (as they should), during Discovery- am I not correct?
Unless "Anna" would have us believe that she is yet another witness, one who has been neglected- LE being desperate to hang poor Cam for the death of his own daughter. Why am I thinking this is a very ham-fisted attempt to come up with an appellate issue after the fact? If there had been any witness, at any time, who saw this, Geragos would surely have known about it and gotten their butts into Court. BTW, the Udder Blog's version of this (older comments) is that there was some sort of mis-communication on the defense side, that these 2 witnesses (Lady who sees Lauren in front and Don't-Die man) are no-shows at Cam 1.
Something hinky must've come up to scare off the Defense, that they weren't used in the first trial, and not even mentioned in this one.
Omama- You're right- Nix writes in latest edition "Defense Witness"- yoicks! I'm thinking this might be the jaw-dropper Sprocket alluded to but was unable to write about much then, or perhaps one that she missed altogether when ill. The other comment, too, about Lauren being on "all fours"- that could well come from the same source then. Holy Heck! I knew we missed some stuff without Sprocket's presence- since we sure aren't going to hear about any of this on the Udder Blog now, are we?
The way I read the comment (Anna from Whittier) is she saw them coming down to AC, not on the way to IP:
I find this frustrating - I saw the two of them coming down the path at Abalone Cove as I was walking up - she was running down the path in front of him looking happy and almost running on air. He was walking down the path behind her deep in thought. When I made a comment I had to repeat myself before he heard what I said. He may have thrown her over, but it seems like they're choosing witnesses that make him look guilty - What happened to innocent until proven guilty? It didn't occur to me that I needed to tell authorities that I'd seen the two of them that day, but I did call Lomita Sheriff when I realized that I was a witness to their attitude at the beginning of their hike. They have my phone number, it hasn't changed.
~~~
If so, the fact that Lauren led Cameron down to AC to the playground has no bearing on her leading him to hike up to and on IP.
I can understand why the defense wouldn't present a witness testifying "He was walking . . . deep in thought."
I'm not buying Anna's testimony. We have the testimony from her school that she was crying all day. We have Sarah's testimony that she was miserable about going with her father. We have the parking lot attendant's testimony that she looked 'scared'. We have lots of testimony that Lauren was quiet and subdued on that walk - but we're supposed to believe that this crying, miserable, unhappy little girl who hadn't eaten anything was all smiles and giggles and running to get to the playground?
Doesn't add up. Doesn't make sense. Isn't true.
Karen, I was able to find Anna's comment because I had read it previously and knew it was on the topix forum. So it was easy enough to search topix for it.
No, I'm not Anna or anyone from Team Cam. I followed this trial the first time around, so I am just reading instead of posting now.
"He was walking . . . deep in thought."
I'm not the only one who found that extremely creepy. Chills!
Planner...
Deep in thought...
Anonymous- Thanks for the clarification on identity- strange things have happened here... I see that "Topix" is actually a separate entity from Daily Breeze, which explains why we couldn't find it- we were looking at DB for it. I imagine that if you live out there you would be familiar with it...
Since you followed Cam 1 (me, I'm playing catch up here), do you think this is the same witness that Geragos refers to in opening of Cam 1? Or another? Because I cannot imagine Geragos not finding this witness and putting her on if at all possible. I know if I had witnessed something, and put together in my mind the potential significance of it, I would not be passive about it. As it stands I don't see this one account hurting the prosecution case so much that they would deliberately suppress it (and risk getting caught out doing so). It's one account VS a bunch of other ones...
You have to admit it is difficult to reconcile this one with all the others from that day. Unless CountryGirl is onto something- maybe Lauren was happy and energized for a brief moment on the path from Abalone Cove, after the park person saw her and after the playground pics; maybe he said something to her to animate her... OR (my guess)- it's just fabricated by a Cam Groupie- he does seem to have some.
And just for curiosity, other than not having Geragos there emoting away this go-round, what major changes do you pick up on from that one to this? Just reading transcripts, its not easy to get a sense of how things "felt" when they happened in that courtroom...
Karen, Anna said she saw them coming down the path as she was walking up.
I took that to mean she saw them right as they were coming from the parking lot to Abalone Cove.
The hike to IP that Cameron said Lauren initiated hadn't begun yet.
That's how I read it anyway.
CG- it IS confusing- so they are on their way TO the playground- this is after the attendant says Lauren is so subdued at the car. That might make sense...
My take is that the witness wasn't helpful to the defense or it was in reference to when Lauren was leaving the playground headed up and in the beginning of the hike.
For a short time, she may have been leading her dad, but everyone else saw her tagging behind.
It's similar to Peterson when these so-called witnesses saw Laci walking the dog in the morning.
Turns out none of them testified, either, but you would think their version was solid gold if you relied on the defense apologists and the press.
Part V Defense closing is up!
http://www.insidesocal.com/crime&courts/2009/09/from-the-cutting-room-floor-ca-3.html
So far it looks like Harris used notes from Geragos' closing in the first trial.
Something just struck me:
Harris:
"When Key-Marer first got pregnant, Brown "absolutely did not think it was his child and wanted her to have an abortion. But when he learned from a paternity test that Lauren was his, a friend said he was "very excited."
So he didn't think Lauren was his baby but wanted her to abort another man's child.
Sprocket's got her latest up as well. And CI has decided that Sprocket is a hack.
Of course! Anyone who questions Saint Cameron must be a hack.
Anyone else find it interesting that the Insider site hasn't been updated since 9/2- Dr. Oppenhoven's (sic?) testimony? I'm getting a strong feeling that the defense witnesses were not exactly all that helpful to "their" side....
NEW POST for new comment thread above.
Post a Comment