Opening statements begin in Antolin Garcia-Torres retrial for the murder of 15-year-old Sierra LaMar

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: notice when you see surveillance footage like this actually taken from the 16. If you're paying attention, the wheels, the rims, look different than the ones in the images from when the car was searched. Well, we know why. Because during the period of time where the friend was being surveilled, they in fact saw him go and change his tires, change his wheels. They were, in fact, able to go talk to the people he did it with and examine the ones of the crime. Nothing more that could be concluded or discerned from that. But that's what you might notice. So this is the exact same red Jetta. And it's significant in this case that it's a bright red car, noticeable black hood, unique. The defendant, after going into the bank, exits the Vineyard Town Center at about 1254, he makes a phone call around this time to Mr. Nianto, the first of the day. The first phone call logged on his call detailed records. And a few minutes later, he's back entering the gate at the ERB park. That gate's video is one of the most helpful components of the case, pinpointing his comings and goings. In that six-hour period, or even if you factor a five-hour period from 730, when he would have made it, he certainly would have made it sooner than 730, but after making it to Paquita, España, in that area, he would have had from 730 until around 1230 to start heading to the Vineyard Town Center. That's five-hour period, that's five hours, even in five hours, even if you cut that in half, out and back, two-and-a-half hours. Plenty of time to make it far more than 25 miles. We're talking about far more than 2,000 square miles. He could have certainly made it to the ocean, and certainly made it to the mountains, certainly made it to the woods, or certainly made it to any one of a number of places in Morgan Hill, areas of wilderness, that would have been quiet and alone on a Friday morning at around 7 a.m. While he could have gone far, he could have also hidden the evidence right in this community, and spent the rest of the day fishing. You're going to hear evidence that the defendant grew up in Morgan Hill. He was more or less comfortable outdoors. He was familiar with wilderness areas all around. And you'll hear from witnesses who knew that about him, who had seen him, or been taken by him, to places that were remote. He had all the knowledge necessary, and five to six hours of opportunity to put Sierra somewhere she could not be found, and where much of her would be lost before she could be found. He was asked about, and it was discussed with him, his movements that day. And you'll hear about that. But significantly, he said that he was going to go take his girlfriend to work. She worked at Chipotle in Morgan Hill. She stopped at the freeway. And he did not say anything else about where he went after that. He obviously had equipment in his car, ready to go fishing or do other activity. And what he said when he met with Herman Leon and Julian Cagnon, not on the 4th, but on the 7th, is he gave a description of where he went. As mentioned on April 4th, Sergeant Leon's still working under a whole chain of command, but leaving the actual investigation, which began as a disappearance, but by April 4th, was a kidnapping murder investigation. He was made aware of the DNA that was found on Sierra's genes at Area 5. So we went with his partner, Sergeant Leonis, to interview the defendant. The purpose wasn't to accuse, as they said. It was to see, is there any reasonable explanation for any of this? Any possible interaction? So they took him aside. He said, do you know Sierra? Do you know Sierra Lamar? And as I said, this has been well covered in the news. At this point, we're now two and a half weeks after the disappearance. You will receive evidence that this was big news. It was in the newspaper regularly. It was all over TV. And it was broadcast TV back then. The sheriff's office was even putting out press releases based on their duty to inform the public, but also because they wanted to get people to share as much information as they could. If anybody had anything to share. You'll hear a lot of people shared information. Some big, some small. A lot of it not helpful in finding Sierra. But you certainly don't want to stop people from coming forward with anything out of the ordinary. You might hear about some things that were out of the ordinary. And the evidence will help you discern which of those things is relevant and which is not. Details were shared widely, like the finding of the thumb, the finding of her bag. But there were other details that were not shared at all, like the finding of his DNA on her genes. It's fair to say that at the time, her disappearance and the basic circumstances were common knowledge in Morgan L. in particular. Now what I'm about to say is only relevant to know what the defendant knew or heard going into these interviews with the police. Not everything in the news is reported accurately, despite their best efforts. So what I'm about to say is not based on what the truth was, but it's what the defendant would have heard. Among the details publicized were that Sierra's phone was found in a field, and her bag was found hidden in a cactus. It was known where and when they were found, and it was known the area she had been missing from. Some details were not known publicly, like the crime lab's identification of him. And all of that status is necessary to understand his state of mind when they speak to him. So on April 4th, the first time they meet him, they're outside of his RV, walk over to the picnic table to have a talk. And he's asked, hey, what did you do for St. Patrick's Day? It was the 17th. He was able to talk about what he did that particular weekend. In fact, it appeared that he had a planned snow trip, and then he left late that night of Saturday into Sunday. And didn't return until the Monday. But he never mentioned in that first interview what he was doing on Friday the 16th. Even though they were asking him about her, even though he would have known the day, even though he would have known that her disappearance had occurred. Also important is that he does not mention that he was anywhere near Sierra's street when they talked to him that first time. He doesn't mention that he went anywhere near her house the day she disappeared. They did not ask him, but he certainly didn't volunteer. Hey, you're asking about Sierra? Yeah, I drove right by there. Or mention what he was doing at 7 o'clock the morning that she went missing. He knows because they told him that they were investigating her disappearance. And he said, we're talking to everyone we can. But he doesn't mention anything about going fishing that morning. The interview closes with them making it abundantly clear in polite terms that they're coming back. They're going to see if they have any follow-up questions for him. And remember, he's already found the GPS tracker. He found it in less than a day or a day and a half. He pulled it off his car and tossed it in an open field. So he's aware that law enforcement is tracking him. He even asked the sergeants about it. The detectives played dumb about that. They acted like they didn't know who put the device on, which of course they certainly did. And as you'll learn in the evidence, they are allowed to withhold information. They're allowed to provide certain details or suggest certain details in order to try and extract a truth from the suspect. So he told them they're definitely coming back to talk to him. And they do on April 7, 2012. He's in fact stopped in his car and brought him to the South County Substation for them to have a discussion in an office space. By that time, he's of course aware that he drives a distinctive car. They've already come to me once, but they're going to talk to me again. Someone must have seen my car or seen me. So on the 7th, again now close to three weeks after Sierra's disappearance, he admits for the first time that he turned left off of Monterey Road in that distinctive red jetta onto Palm, which is the most direct route between his house and Sierra's house. He admits that he left at about 7 in the morning, but he doesn't admit to stopping or seeing Sierra. He puts himself at the area of the crime scene. I say the area of the crime scene because, unfortunately, we don't know exactly where the crime scene is. In this case, the evidence will establish that there is a crime scene. It just can't tell us a pinpoint of where. And where, by his own admission, he shouldn't be. He told him that he went out that morning alone and to go fishing. He was going to drive through the reservoirs of Chesbro and the U.S., which are both west of Morgan Hill. You see those here. The body of water in the green region to the bottom left. And you see the Chesbro Reservoir north of that. And you see a red pin for the defendant's residence, the Maple Leaf RV Park. Now, this map shows you that if the defendant was truly going fishing that day, how many turns he would have to miss to get to the fishing spots he was aiming for that were reasonably close to his RV park. And I'll be frank with you. The evidence will show the idea that he set out to go fishing that morning was a lie. The evidence will show that when he turned out of his driveway and turned right on the Monterey Road, the very first left would be the best route to get to Uvas. That's Watsonville Road. He could have turned at Tenet. Also, to get to the Uvas from the Chesbro, the most direct route. It comes to West Edmondson. He could have turned to Dunn Avenue and gotten back if he realized he'd gone too far. Or at Yagas, another direct route to Chesbro, if he lived further north than he lived. Or even any number of other turns that he could have taken to get to any of those bodies of water. Instead, he told the detectives, that he drove north seven miles out of the way and just happened to turn on Palm Avenue. Now, if he had realized that he had gone too far, there's any other number of cross streets to connect back to Santa Teresa or Hale, as it is for Gersal, or anything. He admitted that, the evidence will show, because he thought someone had seen him in his car. He had come up with a story. He had to come up with a story. Objection argumentative. Of a rule. Whether he visited a reservoir after his crimes to dispose of evidence or just to pass the time, since he had plenty of time, does not make his reason any more credible. We don't have evidence necessarily of what he did with the remaining four to five hours. Another key moment in the interview. Later on, the detectives bring up the topic of DNA. It's necessary to mention for a moment that Sergeant Saddam and Quinones presented Mr. Garcia-Torres a bit of information about what DNA is, as much as I've tried my best to do this morning. And what it can do for investigative techniques. I'm not suggesting in any way that they're not familiar with DNA. But what they say about it is not necessarily what the truth is. We're going to have you rely on criminalists to learn about the way DNA truly works. But they're suggesting things to get him talking and to see what his response is. And the purpose or value of the way they describe it is not for the truth of DNA. They're not going to be offered as experts in the legal sense to be allowed to give you those opinions. They're obviously familiar with it from their work. But the value is in the public defender response. Criminal forensic scientists will talk about how DNA is transferred, what types of cells are in the human body, what types of DNA we collect, and things like that. But just so you understand what the detectives are talking about, what they're doing is seeing what the response it generates. Even more important, they do not mention anything about ejaculate, or semen, or sperm, or anything sexual. They never mention it. And certainly don't mention anything specifically being found in CRS clothes. Nothing like that was reported in the news. And so the defendant's response you're about to hear is what he thinks law enforcement knows. what he thinks law enforcement has already found or might find if they ever find their body. Because he knows what happened. [00:16:12] Speaker 2: What do you know about DNA? Oh, it looks. You ever heard of it? Yeah. What did you hear about? Just what they teach me in school. What's what? Uh, it's everybody you've had to go with DNA. Yeah, it's kind of like, uh, like Nike. Okay, yeah. Like mine, yeah, it's a horse. [00:16:34] Speaker ?: And, um, that's what they take and actually identify people. [00:16:39] Speaker 2: But that might be a name, you know, to come in contact with somebody to transfer these types of things as well. Okay. No, I think that's, you know, that's something to do to look for and stuff like that. Yeah. So, um, do you know how that stuff works? How what that works? How DNA works and how the exam that they find out who belongs to and because you were less than those who are on file things like that? Okay. You were alive and evidence, right? On what? On a case. Okay. And, um, we were having a lot of our sub-examination. And, um, when they finished these examinations, um, are we going to find any of your DNA? No, what do you think of? What do you think of? I mean, it depends on how you get DNA. How are you going to get DNA? I'm not understanding your question. Do you want to try it? Mm-hmm. Oh, I'll try it. Yeah, uh, really, really, you're not saying, right? Like, you said, it's almost like for your friends. Mm-hmm. The friends are even better, um, worse than some others. Okay, so, DNA is like, a recipe that you need to do. Okay, either one or one you, right, you don't have an identical twin. Mm-hmm. When you go twin, you're not, right? Yeah. So, the things that make you use are your DNA. Yeah. Well, that I understand. Okay. Um, what I'm asking you is, after the crime month, after the laboratory, all the scientists are done, all the evidence we have, is there going to be any, is there going to be any, is there going to be any of your fingerprints? No. No? No. [00:18:39] Speaker ?: Okay. [00:18:42] Speaker 2: You're positive. I'm pretty positive. I mean, I don't go around using my DNA, but everywhere. Well, do you know that DNA is transferred? Blood? Not just blood. Literally, while we've been talking in this room, all three of our DNA is in this room already. Okay. Because every time you speak, even though you don't notice it or see it, literally, a spit or a spill will come out. Yeah. And that has your DNA in it. Okay. And every time you touch something, whether it's with your paper prints or not, you leave your DNA in it. Yeah. Okay. Your arm. Right. Have you ever seen kind of like that old commercial that you're using peanut butter cup when one person has a jar of peanut butter and the other one has a chocolate bar? And they crash into each other. You had one, so you had chocolate on my peanut butter. No, you had peanut butter on my chocolate. No, you had another peanut butter on my chocolate. Okay. Yeah. You're a man. Yeah. You're really cool. That's kind of what happened both with DNA. Okay. Right. When you and I shook hands, oh, my DNA is that I need to be DNA. Okay. Right. So, I mean, that's how simple it is. We're not going to talk about it. We're trying to get it everywhere. And in order to be there, we have to be either in direct contact or close proximity. We don't have to be close to each other. Okay. Right. If I'm in a totally different room, you're planning on my DNA. Right. And so what we're asking for and we're trying to, well, what we're saying is, is there any reason why when it is gay, you know, when all the black folks come out, that there's a lot of animals might say, hey, it looks like antler's DNA is here or there, or are you holding fingerprints? No. No reason. No. I mean, but I could think of no. if it does turn out with your DNA, what would be the reason? What would be your fingerprints? I mean, it's kind of embarrassing what you said. And you don't have a thing better. We're all doing that. We're all doing that. Okay. We need you to be completely honest with us. I mean, I like masturbating. Okay. So I, that's it. I mean, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Well, we kind of need to know that. Yeah. It's it. You know, everyone does that. Men and women. Okay. They just don't talk about it wrong. Well, yeah, I mean, it's not something that all true about the truth. Absolutely. Okay. We'll understand that. You know, and we don't even put a job, but I'm going with your explanation. You know, I like to masturbate. I like to masturbate, so, yeah, so. What does that mean? I mean, I like masturbate, my DNA comes out like that. Baby, tell me. Okay. Yeah, we're going to get to meet some about that. What is that baby? I like being, I like how I mean, one of my biggest things is kind of a better thing. I do masturbate in my car, so, yeah. Okay. That's my journey. Are you there? I'm not for you guys. No, it's not. Okay. We're trying to advise you. You can be a doctor. Okay. Yeah. Uh, do you like masturbation? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we're not going to run out. I don't think that. I don't think that's pretty embarrassing. I do have masturbation in my car so that I do masturbate. Okay. So I can do it. I don't get it wrong and throw it out. Things aren't required. It's empty. I'm just trying to make you do more. Yeah, I mean, that's the only way my DNA would get out there that I would think so. Okay. You masturbate in your car. How would your DNA get out there? Well, I throw it away. You throw your DNA away there. What are these like little webmaps or something? What are they? [00:22:59] Speaker ?: We have to provide free that might [00:23:00] Speaker 2: pull the [00:23:01] Speaker ?: paper. Do I take it? Yeah. We're done. [00:23:15] Speaker 1: You will hear several excerpts of that interview. You will have all the context you need to understand what the defendant knew when he said that. what the detectives knew when they asked their questions and why they asked him. That was his first and only explanation of how DNA from him would get onto Sierra or her clients. You now understand why I pointed out the detectives are talking about DNA may not be how it's explained by the qualified people who study it. And both the defense and the prosecution are entitled that you rely on people who are qualified to give those opinions. Why you're talking about it. It comes out when you speak. It's just spittled everywhere. So did you talk to her? If you touch, you shake hands. You can get DNA right there. Now, the experts might educate you on whether that can happen, how often that happens, the reasons that might not happen every single time. But did you shake her hand? Still, no admission by the defendant that he came into contact with the person. He admitted driving right by the morning she disappeared. At the time she disappeared. And the evidence will show there's no tissue that blew out the window in Ed Sierra's jeans. His DNA is on her. Her DNA is in his car. The search of the red jetta did reveal that the defendant had toilet paper in his car. You will learn that the crime lab, discovered seam stains on a bandana underneath the right front passenger seat on a removable carpet in the trunk of the car. Not the carpeting that's glued down, but a removable flap of carpet in the trunk had seam stains from the defendant, which is nearby where that rope was, sitting on the bottom of the trunk. And again, the evidence will not suggest the defendant was doing anything else with that rope other than tying knots, but that rope came into contact with what else was in the trunk. And it came into contact with Sierra's hair, no other. The evidence in this case will show you that the defendant kidnapped Sierra Lamar. The evidence will show you this and it will show you why. He picked someone small, young, and vulnerable. A 15-year-old girl immersed in her own life with her headphones in her ears as she walked towards the bus. And the evidence will show that when he took her. He did it with such force and rapidity that he was able to avoid detection. No one noticed. No neighbors. No one heard. With the time that he had, he was able to take her away, to strip her down of every piece of cloak on her back. And once he killed her, he was able to hide her, all before her family even knew she was in store. The evidence will show that the defendant killed Sierra. We will not be able to prove to you exactly where she died, or how she died, or what was done to her before she died. Because of the defendant's actions and the realities of the environment, her body has not been found. for that reason alone, I will be unable to present you with a death certificate for Sierra Moore. You will learn why. But we will prove that his DNA is on her clothes, and her DNA is in the back of his car, and in the trunk. And we will leave you with any reasonable doubt that he kidnapped and killed her, that he is the one who did. The evidence will show that Sierra is dead because she has not been seen or heard of by anyone in 15 years. And she did not have the means to go 15 years undetected. Incidentally, Sierra was born, as you heard, October 19th of 1996. Two weeks ago today, the day you swore your oath of service. She would turn 30 years old. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a preview of the case that I will present you. You will learn other details from forensic evidence and forensic discipline. You will learn that his phone and his call detail records were examined. And you will learn that there are other movements, isolated points in time of data, that could be interpreted. Like the fact that at 5.04 p.m. his phone records are consistent with him being in an area east of where he dropped off his girlfriend to work. And are consistent with being at an area of a park along the Anderson Dam. The significance of that is after his girlfriend is at work. There's no other evidence that he was driving around the Sierra with Francine unaware. But it's a place he went to, a remote location, if that's where he was, either to discard evidence or just to go. And it's a place he didn't talk to the police about when he told them where he again. This is a preview of the case I will present to you. Throughout this trial, you're going to learn more than you ever thought you'd want to know about DNA, as for some of you. A range of other forensic disciplines, evidence collection procedures, and all of the other things that law enforcement does to ensure the integrity and reliability of the information that's presented to jurors like yourself. You're going to learn about the width of the human hair, you're going to learn about the inner components of cell phones, and how mobile networks make things tick. All of this will take time, but it will make sense. Now, I have no doubt the defense will have a different take on much, if not everything, I just told you throughout this case. And whatever explanation the defense has, if you choose top of it, if it requires a response, you will get it. And at the end of the trial, at the end of all of that, I'm going to ask you to return the guilt of the kidnapping and murder of Sarah Lamar. [00:30:37] Speaker ?: Thank you, Mr. Kang. Thank you, Mr. Wilkins. Thank you. [00:31:05] Speaker 3: Good afternoon. I want to start off by thanking you for being part of this case. On behalf of Mr. Garcia-Torres and the whole defense team, we want to thank you for agreeing to be jurors in this case. Let's start with an overview of where we're at now. We're here in opening statements, and you're going to see what's going to happen next. Starting tomorrow, you're going to hear evidence. That's when the evidence begins. It's important to keep an open mind throughout this entire process because, as you're going to see, the defense isn't going to have the opportunity to call witnesses until probably next year. So, it's important to keep an open mind throughout this trial. So, the way it's going to work is after the opening statement, we go into evidence. It's going to go on for months. And then, from there, what's going to happen is we're going to do jury instructions. The judge will give you the law. And then, we'll do closing arguments. And then, the case will be handed to you to decide. So, I want to talk to you a little bit about how I'm going to break up this opening statement for you. I want to start off with an introduction about the case. So, let's get into that. This is a tragic case. That's not in dispute. Sierra Lamar, she vanished on March 16th, 2012. And she was supposed to go to school that day. The evidence is going to show that she was home. We're going to be able to establish she was home between 7/11 and 7/12. This was 14 years ago when she disappeared. And law enforcement at that time, and even now, they search for answers. And immediately after she disappeared, the search for her was massive. We're talking about the Sheriff's Department, Santa Clara County Search and Rescue, the FBI. I think the Secret Service was involved. There was many agencies involved in the search for Sierra Lamar because they were looking for answers. You're going to hear that the detectives in this case, or the detective Hermann Leon, he even went as far as seeking psychic or a psychic. You're going to hear evidence that he was driving around Morgan Hill with a psychic because they were searching for answers. So towards the end of March 2012, in a desire to solve this case, law enforcement, they built a case based on theory. And that's what this case is about. It's about theory, and that's it. We're going to discuss the evidence that's going to be presented to you. And you're going to find that it's contradicted. The government's evidence is contradicted by time, by physics, and by law enforcement's own witnesses. The timing of events in this case, the defense, we're going to go through it in detail. We're going to break down the timing of events. Because what you're going to see when you look at the timeline, you look at everything that happened on that particular date, and you break it down and you look at the evidence regarding this. And what I mean by that, we're talking about videos, bus videos, the bus, the school bus that has a video on it. Eyewitnesses who are in the area, we can establish a solid timeline, an impossible timeline. And I say impossible because you're going to see that it's impossible for the prosecutor to prove what he's saying to you when you look at the timeline. And let's get into the facts, and let's start with that. You're going to hear evidence that Sierra Le Mar was at home at around 7 in the morning. A little bit after, you can see she's fully dressed to go to school. She has full makeup on, and we know she's ready to go to school. She's dressed up, ready to go at around 7:11 AM. We know that because she takes a selfie of herself. That was a picture in the shark's jersey that you saw. She takes that selfie and the time stamp is 7:11, which makes sense. You're going to see it makes sense because her school bus passes by at 7:24. And it's an eight minute walk approximately from her home. It's half a mile to the school bus stop. And it takes about eight minutes. And for her to be ready to go at around 8:12, that makes sense. And she sends a text to a friend. That's the Yian text, Y-E. She sends that text at 7:12. So we know at about that time she was ready to go. And it makes sense that she's going to leave at around 7:13. An eight minute walk to get to the bus stop around 7:24. So this timeline is important, and I'm going to go through it with you. And you're going to hear from Sergeant Leon. He was the detective in this case. He's going to tell you that he spent a lot of time on this timeline. He's walked from Sierra's home, the half mile to the bus stop. And he timed himself. And he's going to tell you, based on what he saw, about eight minutes sounds right. So I want to tell you that there's forensic evidence that you're going to hear in this case, regarding soil analysis. And this forensic evidence, regarding the soil analysis, is going to prove to you that Sierra made it to her bus stop. That's correct. She made it to her bus stop, based on the forensic evidence. And let me explain to you what I mean by that. So what law enforcement did around this time, is they went to the various areas of interest. When I say that, I mean from her home to the bus stop. They took soil samples. Where her phone was found, they took a soil sample. Areas of the shed, where her belongings were found, they took soil samples. But more importantly, for this case, is they took a soil sample from her bus stop, which is K44. That's the name of the sample. So what you're going to hear is that these samples were sent to a lab. And a well-known forensic scientist by the name of Samuel Kalanick. He also works with Ethan Groves. These guys, what they did was they took the mud and the trace evidence from Sierra Lamar's cloak, and they took the soil samples, all these various soil samples, and they tested it. They did soil analysis to see where, if you could match the mud from Sierra Lamar's cloak with these samples. And what they found is they were able to exclude many of these locations. And what they found is the soil that was more consistent with the mud on the cloak was the soil around the bus stop. But you're going to hear more evidence on this. It's not just the soil that was correct, but there are these reflective glass beads that we're going to talk a lot about. And let me tell you what these reflective glass beads are. If you walk down the road, you might see them there and it looks like sand. But under the microscope, you're going to see -- I'm going to show you some pictures later. You're going to see that there are these little round spheres. They're little circle, little balls. And what happens is these little spheres, when they're building the roadway, they'll paint stripes on the road, and then they'll spray it with these little beads. And the intent is that the beads stick on the wet paint so that when you're driving down the road and your flat lights hit that particular paint, it's going to reflect. And then you're going to be able to see the lines of the road. This is important because these glass beads, you're going to hear where they took the soil sample at the bus stop, at the school bus stop, it was a low point coming off the road. And you're going to hear evidence or testimony that these beads, they wash away and they go to the side of the road. And that could explain why there was more glass beads in the area of the bus stop than there was in other areas. So you have the glass beads and you have the soil that matches. And I'm going to tell you why that matches. So when we talk about this clothes that was examined belonging to Sierra Lamar, this is the sweater and the jeans. You're going to hear that these tiny reflective glass beads were on the front and the back of the sweater, front and the back of the jeans. In other words, her clothes were covered with these reflective glass beads. And this is important for several reasons. Number one, it's another piece of circumstantial evidence that places her at her bus stop. But number two, and we're going to get into this in more detail, is the fact that these glass beads, if you look at them from the naked eye, I'm going to show you pictures of them in a little bit, they resemble sand. If you see them, you're going to think it's sand. But under magnification, you're going to see their spheres. So this is important because you have all these small spheres all over her clothes. And this could have gone on her clothes from some type of struggle at her bus stop, where she rolls around in the area of her bus stop and gets these glass beads all over her clothes. But what you're going to hear is, if somebody was to force her into their car, you would expect these glass beads to be everywhere. They would shed like, think of it sand when you go to the beach. You know, they're going to shed and they're going to go everywhere. You're going to hear testimony from the criminals. They're going to talk to you about how these glass beads are difficult to clean or pick out. And what you're going to hear from the criminal is she actually used tape pulls, to use tape to stick it. But what's important about these glass beads is that when they searched Mr. Garcia towards his car on April 9th and 10th of 2012, they didn't find any glass beads. And you're going to see pictures. I'm going to get into that later. You're going to see pictures of Mr. Garcia towards his car. When they processed it, it was filthy. It hadn't been cleaned in quite some time. So those are important facts to consider. But let me continue to go through this timeline. And we'll continue with this timeline and let's talk about the school bus. So if we look at the time the bus would have been there, that eight minute walk and the time she was ready, so if we put all that together with the forensic evidence, it makes sense that Sierra Lamar, she would have got to the area of her bus stop at about as early as 720, as far back as 722. So between 720 and 722 makes sense given all the other evidence, when you look at the totality of the evidence. And let me tell you why that's important. When we look at the details of the events, and let me kind of back up a little bit and talk about Mr. Garcia-Torres. The evidence is going to show that he leaves his home at 7 in the morning. And we know that because there's a video. You're going to see a video camera pointed towards the exit of his trailer park. And you're going to actually see him leave in his car. And it's a red Jetta with a distinctive black hood on. Very distinguishable. So you're going to hear that he leaves at 7 in the morning. And Detective Leone is going to testify that what he did was he drove from Mr. Garcia-Torres' home to the area of the bus stop many times. And he did this because he wanted to know how long it would have taken Mr. Garcia-Torres to go from his home to the school bus stop. And what you're going to find the facts that Mr. Sergeant Leone is going to testify to is that it took him as little as 11 minutes to go from Mr. Garcia-Torres' home to the bus stop area and as much as 13 minutes. So why that's important? It's important because at the time Mr. Garcia-Torres would have passed by the bus stop area, Sierra Lamar would have been half a mile away at her homestead. Because he would have passed by there between 7-11 and 7-13. There was no encounter. What you're going to find is that not a single witness is going to say that they saw Mr. Garcia-Torres or his distinctive red jetta in the area of Sierra Lamar's bus stop or her home. No one's going to come in and say that. There's not going to be any videos, there's not going to be any type of evidence that's going to place him in that area on that particular morning. You're going to find evidence that points the other way. Because you're going to hear from an important eyewitness in this case. Her name is Tien Kehoe. This is a woman who lived south of the bus stop by Monterey Road. She lived in the area. And on that particular morning, as she does every morning, she was commuting to work. And you're going to hear that she lived a little south of Palm. And she would normally drive towards Bailey Road. She worked for a dental office past Bailey Road in a little plaza. And what she's going to tell you is that she was running late that day. She normally starts work at 7:30 in the morning. On this particular day, she was late and she didn't get to work until 7:40. And we actually have her time card, which is going to show that she punched in at 7:40. And I'm going to tell you why this timeline is important, or this part of the timeline. Because Ms. Kehoe, she drives north on Monterey. She makes a left on Palm. And as she approaches Sierra Lamar's bus stop, she doesn't see anything unusual. She doesn't see Sierra Lamar. She doesn't see a red Jetta. She doesn't see anything unusual. And we can place her there somewhere around 7:22, maybe 7:23. And I'm going to tell you how we can place her there. So, as she drives further down Palm, she makes a right on Santa Teresa. It's actually Hale there, but it's going to turn into Santa Teresa in the next block. So, on that particular street, on Palm and Hale, you're going to hear evidence about a VTA bus. This bus has a camera in the front with the time stamp. And this bus, you're going to see that at 7:19 a.m. It's driving south on Santa Teresa. And it goes all the way to Palm. And it's there on Palm at 7:21 and 42 seconds. And what you're going to hear from the testimony of Ms. Cahill is that her car is not seen on this VTA bus video. And what that means is she came after 7:21 and 42 seconds. Meaning 7:22 sounds about right. So that she missed the camera or the bus. So what's important about Ms. Cahill's testimony, and this is the big one. She makes a right on Hale. It's turning into Santa Teresa Boulevard. As she's approaching the intersection of Scheller and Santa Teresa, she sees a car. It's a light gold, light brown car. I think it was the other way around. I think she said it was a light brown, gold car. This car, she'll later describe it as having these big plastic louvers on the back. It was like a hatchback with two doors. This car is stopped right there on the corner of Santa Teresa and Scheller. The car is actually on Scheller, and it's pointed towards Santa Teresa. And the car is sitting there. And at this point, she says that she believed the time was 7:23, but she uses the word ish. Which means, you know, 7:23, give or take a minute or so. And what's important about her seeing this car in that area was that this car was in the exact area where Sierra Lamar's phone was found later the next day. It was in that same exact area. And what you'll find is that this particular car is sitting there, and as Ms. K.O. approaches the car, it jumps out in front of her, almost running her off the road. And the car proceeds in front of her, driving erratically. It's swerving within the lane. It's a 45 mile an hour zone, and the car is going about 15 miles an hour. And it scares her. She decides to kind of keep a distance from that car. And that car continues to drive in that manner until it gets to the area of Laguna and Santa Teresa. And what's significant about Laguna and Santa Teresa is that that's the same street where the shed is at, where Sierra Lamar's belongings are found. But this car doesn't turn right on Laguna. What it does, it continues, after it's driving erratically and it gets to Laguna, it then speeds up and it begins to drive normally. And then the car ends up going right on Bailey. And she turns left and she goes to her work. So you're going to see and you're going to hear evidence about what's on that side. I'm going to show you pictures of this in a little bit. You're going to hear what's on that side of Bailey. And I'll show you pictures of the general area where you're going to see there's an overpath and the overpath over Monterey Road. So you can access Monterey Road through that overpath. You can go to 101. But before you get to that overpath, I'll show you some pictures of the general area. You're going to see there's a driveway. And then in that driveway, there's a farm there. It's an open field. And you're going to see there's an access road or a farm road within those fields. It's a dirt road. And that dirt road goes parallel to Monterey Road, but on the farm side of it. And it goes all the way to Laguna. And then you're going to see, so you can access Laguna from that road. And what's important about Laguna is Laguna, and I'll show you this on the map, where the shed was at. There's that farm road, which would be, I guess that would be east of Laguna. West of Laguna would be San Teresa Road. And we'll show you photographs of all that. So we have this vehicle that Ms. Cahill talks about. And we have a timeline placing that vehicle in the key area, areas of where the bone was found at the right time. [00:52:21] Speaker ?: All right. [00:52:23] Speaker 3: Let's go over some slides and let's talk about the evidence. Before that, let me show you some photographs of the maps. If you can give me a second. Sure. Before we... [00:52:36] Speaker 4: Let's go for about five or ten more minutes. Okay. [00:52:38] Speaker ?: I'm going to show you with the little maps. [00:52:53] Speaker 3: So this is the general area. We're going to provide better maps and stuff. I don't know if you probably can't see it from there. But just as you can see the lines, this is Palm. So I'm going to go and I'm going to point to Monterey Boulevard. And then this would be Palm here. And then the next street would be Daughtery. And this is where the bus stop is at, right where the cursor is at. And then if you go further down Palm, that's Hale. And then as you take a ride on Hale, you're going to see Scheller. There's actually... It says Safe Pole Saffron Farm. That's the area where the phone was found. I'm going to show you pictures of those areas in just a bit. And then if you continue down Santa Teresa, it's going to take you to Laguna. And then let me show you... If you continue down, this is Laguna. The shed you're going to find was somewhere in this area here. You'll see pictures of it in just a minute. This is Laguna and Santa Teresa. Ms. Cahill described the car going further on Santa Teresa. And then I'll show you another picture of Santa Teresa Bailey. This is Santa Teresa. This is Bailey. Ms. Cahill went this way. It would have been left on Bailey. The other vehicle went right on Bailey. And then let me show you what's over there in that area. I'm going to start off with... This is Bailey Road. This is an overpath I discussed earlier. Before you go to the overpath, you're going to see there's a white gate here and there's a road. This road goes to this little farm road that cuts across all the way to Laguna. And then I'll show you what's on the other side of Monterey and Laguna. So this is a picture that you're going to see. This is actually on Monterey. And the street that's here, that's Laguna. So this is a street that goes all the way through to Monterey, but it's blocked off by a train draft, but also by these gates. The farm access road, you can see it over here. It goes that way to the right of the photograph. And then there's a road that's behind these trees that connects to Laguna. Do you have time for some more time here? [00:55:56] Speaker 4: Whenever there's a natural breaking spot from now for five minutes. [00:56:01] Speaker 3: Okay, because, yeah, this is probably a good time so I can queue up the rest of the stuff. Okay, great. [00:56:06] Speaker 4: So we're going to take our afternoon break, 15 minutes. Please, again, to our jurors congregate in the jury assembly room. We'll bring you up as a group. Please remember when you have a mission and we will see you soon. Like we've been doing, the jurors go first and then we're going to clear the gallery. [00:56:38] Speaker 5: All right, you've been listening to the defendant and his representation laying out their case in the retrial. His name is Antolin Garcia Torres, and we've just heard from the defendant's representation. They're taking an afternoon break right now. Outlined his case on this whole thing, saying multiple agencies were involved in the search. This case is based on theory and an impossible timeline outlying how forensic evidence shows she made it to the bus stop. And the beads that were found on her clothes were washed away with rain, collected on the side of the road, found near the bus stop. So, again, the defense attorney laying out his side of things and explaining his story on this whole case. And if you're just joining us and you're joining us late, this is all for a retrial of the murder of Sierra Lamar. The man accused of killing her is back on trial. His name is Antolin Garcia Torres, and he was convicted of murder back in 2017. That conviction was overturned earlier this year after an appellate court in San Jose ruled the previous kidnapping cases. He was alleged of three suspected kidnapping cases, tracing back to 2009. And at the time, those cases were brought as evidence in an initial trial. Appellate court ruled that those were unrelated. So today we've been hearing opening statements from both sides in this retrial, and we've got an inside look inside the courtroom. And there have been some disturbing details as well. So, again, that is the latest right now. In an afternoon break, we'll give you the latest as soon as we get more information and as soon as they rejoin. You've been watching Seaver. Thank you. [00:58:48] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:01:02] Speaker 6: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:01:07] Speaker ?: Thank you. [01:01:07] Speaker 6: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That happened just after midnight and you can see police still out at the scene today. [01:01:18] Speaker 7: We have two fatalities, two fatalities that are confirmed. We do not know the circumstances under which those fatalities occurred. There are many scenarios in which firearms can be used. We don't know if you're listening carefully. We're not calling this a homicide. We haven't confirmed that this is a homicide or suicide or any other type of death. We have not made that declaration yet. We have not made that declaration yet. We are investigating the circumstances under which these individuals died as a result of gunshot wounds here at the scene. [01:01:48] Speaker 6: But Sheriff's officials have said there's no threat to the public right now. Let's get a check in our first alert weather now. Taking a live look at Pacifica where work continues on that crumbling pier. National Weather Service has issued a beach hazard statement through tomorrow. Meteorologist Jessica Birch keeping an eye on it. [01:02:07] Speaker 8: And you can see those whipping waves too. I mean, we can see rip currents and sneaker waves. It's not the time to be jumping out in the water. And as early as tomorrow, we have a big shift in the forecast anyways that we need to get straight into. Let's start off, though, with daytime highs today from the coast all the way off into our inland microclimates. Not seeing too much of a change from our shoreline stretched over into those usual hot spots, especially during the summer months. Today, we're all sitting in the 60s from our North Bay stretched into the Santa Clara Valley and everywhere in between. Now, as early as tomorrow, this is the big story for us in the forecast. As we head outside into our Tuesday morning forecast, just around 5:00 a.m., we're starting to see light scattered showers in the forecast. And that will continue to push in from offshore as we head into the afternoon hours, too. I'm pausing the clock just around 12:00 a.m. tomorrow. So 24 hours from now, we're going to see light scattered showers on that Doppler radar. And as we advance the clock all the way into the 5:00 a.m. tomorrow night, those continue to push off into the east. And for our friends up in the North Bay, we'll see a little bit more accumulation off into that region, too. We're going to talk more about that timeline and how long this is expected to last coming up in a bit. But for now, back to you. [01:03:07] Speaker 6: We are just a day away from the midterm elections. All this buildup, and the Trump administration is now escalating its effort to have California set aside 20,000 mail-in ballots. They're claiming those ballots are coming from non-citizens. On Friday, the appeals court rejected the order to California officials to impound those ballots. Now the administration is asking the Supreme Court to intervene. The Justice Department says that would help prevent ineligible voters from diluting the results of valid ballots. A New York Times-Siena poll, meantime, shows that Democratic candidates are leading in at least five of seven battleground states. That includes Texas, Kansas, Maine, Ohio, and Michigan. They also hold a narrow edge in Alaska, and the race in Iowa is effectively tied. Voters polled were frustrated over the president's handling of the economy. To win control of the Senate, Democrats have to hold all their current seats and then flip four from Republicans. Last-minute surprise endorsement threatens to shake up one key race which could determine which party controls the Senate after the midterm elections. As Natalie Brand reports, Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens now says that she will support the Republican Senate candidate in that state. [01:04:25] Speaker 9: Michigan's Democratic Senate candidate, Abdul El-Sayed, appeared alongside Senator Elizabeth Warren to kick off the final day of campaigning. [01:04:34] Speaker 10: We took that campaign all over the state. I've done 120 different cities, 700 public events. We went everywhere, we talked to everybody. [01:04:43] Speaker 9: It comes after an unexpected twist in the battleground race Sunday with Democratic Congresswoman Haley Stevens announcing she's backing Republican Mike Rogers. [01:04:52] Speaker 10: And I will tell you why, because we have to stand with country. We can't stand with hate. We can't stand with Hassan Piker. [01:05:01] Speaker 9: Stevens' shakeup of the race in Michigan is one of five toss-up contests that could determine which party controls the U.S. Senate. [01:05:09] Speaker 11: I'd love her to join the Republican Party, actually. I think that could happen maybe. [01:05:14] Speaker 9: President Trump praised Stevens' decision while campaigning in Iowa Sunday. His stops in Dubuque and Kansas were the last two after holding about 30 rallies nationwide for GOP candidates. [01:05:25] Speaker 11: We've done it for one simple reason, to stop America-hating communists and jihadists from taking over the United States Congress. [01:05:33] Speaker 9: The president says he's holding a series of tele-rallies today and will deliver a closing message before the midterms at the Lincoln Memorial reflecting pool this afternoon. [01:05:42] Speaker 6: Abdul Alcied's campaign says he raised more than $2.4 million since Stevens' surprise announcement. And a reminder, we are your election station as this all unfolds. We'd love you to join us election day and night starting at 4:00 on air and streaming on the free CBS News app. Snapchat has reached a settlement with two teens today after claims that the social media app is designed to be addictive, which causes depression, anxiety and eating disorders. No word on the terms of that settlement agreement. And Snapchat isn't the only platform that was sued just last week. Meta also settled with a teenager who claimed similar negative effects. The Golden State Valkyries are the WNBA champions, if you haven't heard. Just two years into their league play, the Valks took the win after a tense Game 7 on Halloween night, beating the Atlanta Dream 68 to 63 in this morning. The team took a little time to reflect on that historic win. [01:06:46] Speaker 12: It's a bond here that I've never really experienced. And when you have people that you love coming to work with, that you love just spending time with off the court too, it's easy to lead or have a voice on the court because we've built that trust. [01:06:59] Speaker 6: Now building the bond was one of the key factors for the Valkyries clinching the win in Game 7 of the finals, making history for the team. And San Francisco was making sure the big win will not be forgotten anytime soon. The city put up Valkyries banners along the Embarcadero with each banner showing a different player. The new edition comes ahead of the championship parade. The Valkyries merch store also gearing up for Wednesday's big parade. They've already made championship hats, new black and purple shirts to celebrate the win. The Valkyries are holding their parade this Wednesday in San Francisco at noon. It starts at the Ferry Building and then ends at King and Second Streets. Bart planning on running extra trains for fans coming into the parade. It's going to be quite a party. And if you're not able to make it to the parade, we have you covered. You can join us for live coverage of the victory celebration starting at 9:30 a.m. Wednesday on KPIX. Still ahead here at noon and streaming on CBS News, Bay Area Dungeness crab season is delayed. We've heard that story before when it will reopen and what it means for fresh crab at the holidays. And a bye week for the 49ers, giving a little extra time for players to try to get off the injury list. Who's been stepping up to fill their shoes? Coming up in our red and gold. [01:08:24] Speaker ?: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. [01:11:24] Speaker 6: Thank you. [01:11:54] Speaker 8: So, it's a quick dose of it, but it doesn't amount to too much. We're not talking about a big washout by any means. So, what I'm going to do right now is I'm going to pull up the map, and I just want to start off once again with our daytime highs throughout the Bay Area. Because from coast off into those inland spots, we're not seeing too much of a change, and day by day this week, we will all warm up just a little bit, but we're all going to do it hand in hand. So, 60s will slowly turn into low 70s right around the corner, but for the day, for today, at least, we're still holding on tight to 60s. Now, one other thing I want to pull up to 60s right now, and we're going to start off in the early morning hours at 5 a.m., from 5 all the way into 8, we see light-scattered showers sweeping in from offshore. I'm pausing the clock just around lunchtime tomorrow to show you. It's still scattered, so keeping that umbrella nearby, having the rain jacket ready to go, especially for the kiddos heading to school, and, of course, you heading to work, it's a good idea to keep that nearby. Now, from 12 all the way into 5, the roads still may be a little slick out there, especially as those light-scattered showers continue to track off into the Sacramento Valley. We're seeing pockets continue to push in from offshore from 5 all the way into midnight, and then the good news is these showers really start to taper off, clearing up as early as Wednesday. In time for the Valkyries, as we are celebrating their win. Now, as we take a look at the next seven days, we are going to time this out into this weekend's forecast. Now, I mentioned a warm-up right around the corner. We're going to be back into the low 70s by Wednesday, upper 70s in the forecast, still with partly cloudy skies as we head into Saturday and Sunday, and as we make our way over into our Bay Area microclimates, tilting that camera up just a little bit higher so you can see what I'm talking about from Oakland over into San Francisco across that Bay Bridge. Our daytime highs are also sitting in the 60s for now, quickly jumping into the 70s, heading into that mid-to-late-week forecast. Partly cloudy skies are sticking around all week long once those showers taper off. We'll have more on that coming up in a bit, Anne. [01:13:36] Speaker 6: Well, this might change the menu for some people's upcoming holiday season meals for the seventh year in a row. California officials delaying the commercial Dungeness crab season because of the large number of whale entanglements off the coast. The season would typically start November 15th, but it has now been postponed until January 1st of next year. The 49ers hoping to get Mike Evans and Deebo Samuel back this week, but while they were out, one young receiver made his case for a bigger role. Jordan Glenn explains in a red and gold report. [01:14:11] Speaker 13: This is DraftKings Red and Gold Report. Jordan Watkins stepped up on Sunday with the top five receivers out. He had three catches, matching his total for the season, and threw a key block on Kalon Black's touchdown run. [01:14:28] Speaker 14: Jordan's a guy who didn't play a lot last year, and I don't think he didn't play a lot early on this season. I think he might have been a healthy scratch early in the season. Injuries suck, but the one benefit of injuries is you get to see other guys get a chance to take advantage of their opportunity. I'm just really happy for Jordan. He's taking steps forward and he's becoming a good player for us, and I think he's only going to get better. [01:14:47] Speaker 15: From day one since I got here, I think he was the first guy to text me whenever I got drafted and welcomed me to the Niners. So he's always been supportive of me and always wants to see me do good, so it's huge. [01:14:59] Speaker 13: For the Red and Gold Report, I'm Vern Glenn. [01:15:03] Speaker 6: Former San Francisco Giants manager Roots Bochy is being considered for the National Baseball Hall of Fame. He's among eight candidates named to this year's contemporary baseball-era ballot. Bochy led the Giants to three World Series titles in 2010, 2012, and 2014. A 16-member committee is going to vote on who gets that title on November 6th. Coming up, a study doctors are calling a wake-up call about those high-caffeine energy drinks the warning signs they want people to watch out for. [01:15:50] Speaker ?: We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2010, 2012, and 2012, and 2012. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2010, 2012, and 2012. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2010, 2012, and 2012. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2010, 2012, and 2012. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2010, 2012, and 2012. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2010, 2012, and 2012. We'll be right back to the National Baseball Hall of Fame in 2012, 2012. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. We'll be right back. [01:18:51] Speaker 8: Well, it's a dry but cloudy day for us today here in the Bay Area, and that's going to look a lot different as we head into the next 24 to 48 hours. We have some light, scattered showers starting to roll in as we head into our Tuesday forecast. Beautiful weather on tap for us once that clears up into Wednesday with a gradual warm-up into early next week, back into the mid-70s for our inland microclimates. Now we make our way over into the Bay Area, and we're seeing similar conditions in the Bay Area, and we're seeing similar conditions in San Francisco stretched all the way over to Oakland. We're going to hold on tight to the 60s for now, back into the 70s by Thursday with mild temperatures heading into this weekend. Back to you. [01:19:21] Speaker 6: The American Heart Association is warning that new findings show a potential link between young adults who consume caffeinated energy drinks and heart attacks. According to some new research, cardiac arrest was reported 11 times more often among those who consumed caffeinated energy drinks and stimulant-related products. Heart attacks were almost five times as likely. Nearly half of the reports linking the two involved younger adults, ages 18 to 34. That's a group that's normally been at low risk for heart problems, but doctors say more research needs to be done. In the meantime, they're warning that the study should serve as a wake-up call, especially for college students and young adults who turn to these sorts of drinks for energy boosts. [01:20:07] Speaker 16: What's concerning about that is you don't think of a 25-year-old as having an underlying heart condition, right? So the study didn't go into what else they were drinking if they had an underlying medical problem. But what we're finding is this is consistent with poison control data and a number of other case reports. So this is sounding an alarm that there could be something going on with energy drinks. [01:20:27] Speaker 6: And how much you consume really plays a role here. Energy drinks can contain more than 200 milligrams of caffeine. And the FDA cites 400 milligrams a day of caffeine. That's about two to three 12-ounce cups of coffee as an amount not generally associated with negative effects for most adults. But some warning signs that somebody's consuming too much caffeine, high blood pressure, and an irregular heartbeat. We'll be right back. All right, let's go back out live to San Jose courtroom where opening statements in the retrial of Antolin Garcia-Torres began today. He is accused of killing 15-year-old Sierra Lamar in 2012. Now, just to recap, the first time he was convicted of Sierra Lamar's murder in 2017, that trial included evidence from three prior attempted kidnapping cases. And an appeals court decided that that might have biased the jury. So this time around, prosecutors are going to stick solely to the evidence in Sierra Lamar's disappearance, including her DNA in his car and his DNA on her clothes. Her body was never found. Now, earlier today, we heard from the prosecution, their opening statements. And now we are hearing live from the defense attorney as he outlines his case that we're going to be hearing over the next several weeks. Let's listen in. [01:22:00] Speaker 3: Now, we want to show you some photographs of the foam, where the foam was found. These were taken by law enforcement as well. We'll go to the next set. So this is Scheller. And where you see an individual walking through the field, I think, I don't know who that is, but we'll go to the next photograph and we're going to see where the foam was found. And then we'll go to the next photograph. And then you can't see it quite there yet, but if we keep going. And then that's so you can see that the soil conditions. And then there's the foam there. And we're going to show you next a close-up of that same foam. So if you can see the foam was there in the field, what's going to be of note and the detectives are going to testify that around the foam there was no tire tracks. There was no footprints. So it would make sense that somebody threw the foam into the field from that area where the car was stopped on Scheller and Santa Teresa. And then, so next, I want to show you some photographs for the bag where it was found and the shed so you can have an idea of what was going on there. So this is a photograph of the bag. You can't quite see it there. There was some paperwork, notebooks, things like that. I'm going to look at the next photograph. And that's the bag tucked away inside the cat die. Next photograph. And then that's another view of that same area except where you can see from the outer area of the cat die. Next photograph. That's a picture of the shed from a distance. So the bag would have been found to the right-hand side of that set of cat die. Next. And the next photograph. More different angles. And then so next I want to show you photographs of the other side of the shed, the surrounding. So you can see all around the shed what it looked like. These were photos from 2012. So if you see there, you're going to see this is just a different angle of the shed so you can see what was on the other side of the shed. Next photo. And then there's a carport area on the other side of the shed that you can look at. We'll see some more photographs of this. [01:25:36] Speaker ?: Next. [01:25:36] Speaker 3: Next. And that's just an area of the soil. They did soil samples for this area as well. And then that's the field around the area of the shed. That particular shed that's on this photograph is from across the street. That's not where the clothes was found. But on the other side of the laguna, these sheds were there. You're going to hear testimony that those sheds are no longer there. They were torn down. Thank you. Okay, up to now, all this, the timeline, we discussed the impossible timeline, this has to do with the allegations of that Sierra Lamar was abducted. That's what we've been talking about so far. So from now on, I want to switch gears a little bit, and I want to talk to you about the evidence you're going to hear in relationship to the charge of murder. So let's talk about that. So the charge here is murder with a special allegation of kidnapping. And the evidence of murder, that I guess you could say is not going to be presented in this case. You're not going to hear evidence of a murder weapon. You're not going to hear evidence of a crime scene. You're not going to hear evidence of a body. You're not going to hear evidence of their blood. You're not going to hear evidence of any type of injury. No evidence of ripped clothes, damaged clothes, pulls, cuts, anything like that. That evidence is not going to be presented to you. I want to talk to you about the bag that was found, that was tucked away, where the tactile was at. That bag had Sierra Lamar's personal belongings, including her clothes, her jeans, makeup. This was an important clue in the case. When they found this, they knew that this was an important clue that could lead to DNA evidence. So preserving the evidence was of importance. And you're going to see that the bag, proper protocols weren't followed. You're going to see that a cork board, just any cork board was used. We don't know where that came from. We don't know who handled that cork board. It was put on the ground. And all the evidence was placed on it. And the fact that it was wet, you're going to hear from the experts that talk about how water is used to transfer DNA. So cross-contamination definitely would have happened in a situation like this. You see the shirt, the sweater. There's no paper being put down. There's nothing to preserve. They're not putting the items on a clean surface. And we'll talk about the glass bead in just a moment. So you're going to hear from Sergeant Randall. He's going to tell you about how he collected these clothes. He's going to tell you that he was using a sheriff's command post that was set up in the area. This is kind of like their office. And, you know, he takes down this board. He gets it because he doesn't have anywhere to take the stage photographs on. He doesn't know where that came from. He doesn't know what the history of that board was. It wasn't a new one. And then that's when he begins to take pictures and doesn't account for DNA protocol. And let's talk about what's critical about these clothes. They're going to testify that it's important. And you're going to hear this from the prosecution's own witness that what they do is they want to make sure they start with a clean surface. Not the floor. Not a dirty floor. A clean surface. You want to lay down clean paper. And then you want to carefully handle the items because you don't want to lose trace evidence. You want to carefully handle the items so that you don't cross contaminate or contaminate these items because you're mishandling the evidence. There's protocols for this and you're going to see they weren't followed. And then you're going to hear testimony from the criminalists. They're going to talk about when they examine these clothes. You know, these glass beads are falling off. They're ending up on the paper later when they're examining these clothes. And there's these glass beads front and back of the sweater, front and back of the jeans. And I want to show you some slides of what these glass beads look like. And this particular slide, it resembles sand. This is to the naked eye. There's no magnification. And if you just look at it like this, you're going to think it's sand. It's in a petri dish. No way to really know that they're reflective glass beads. This is a picture of the same thing under magnification. And see, that's where you can see the spheres. They're different sizes. These, you're going to hear a lot of evidence about this from the gross department. They're, there's nothing unique about them. They're on all the roads in Santa Clara County. And then this is another picture of a glass bead on, this is on sticky paper or tape. That's the way they secure them. And I believe that what you see, those little black things, those are fibers from the sweater. This would have been a pick-pull from the sweater. This is a picture of Mr. Garcia Torres' vehicle when they examined it. This would have been on April 9th and 10th. This probably was on the 9th. This is the rear of the vehicle. What's important about this photograph is that there was no cleaning of this car. And then you see a picture of the floor. It looks like it hasn't been cleaned in quite some time. So, let's talk about the bag next. And the type of testing that was done on this bag. You're going to hear that this bag was handled and examined for DNA and trace evidence. The handle, the interior, exterior of the bag was examined. And there was nothing significant. No DNA. No trace evidence that was significant there. All the belongings inside were tested for fingerprints. Some of it was examined for DNA. And there was nothing significant about that. But more importantly, the clothes that we see that was recovered in that bag. Now, we're talking about socks, panties, bra, shoes. All of that was examined and analyzed to see if there was any type of usable evidence. And there was nothing significant there. In regards to this clothes, you're going to find that there was no tears. They weren't ripped. There were no holes. No evidence to suggest, you know, any type of violence on the particular clothes. So, let's focus on the sweater for a bit. This is the sweater that Sierra borrowed from her friends. And I want to talk about some of the statements made by the prosecutor earlier today. He talked about fiber evidence. That this sweater had tape pools from the sweater. And then they examined the fibers from the sweater. And you're going to hear that these fibers, that their own witness is going to testify that they recovered gray fibers. They recovered black fibers. In total, it was seven fibers. And he's going to tell you that these fibers are common color. That means there's nothing unique about the color. There's nothing unique about these fibers. They're fibers that are not necessarily unique to a car. So, these are fibers that could be found in carpet. They could be found in mats. They could be found in garments, clothes. There's nothing unique about these fibers to say that they can be distinguished in some way. You're going to hear that the Jetta did have carpet. They did have mats. But the expert is going to tell you that there's no way to say that the fibers collected from the clothes could be matched to the carpet or mats from Mr. Garcia Torres' car. So, that can't be done. That can't be done. That can't be done. He's not going to say that there's a match. Not at all. All he can say is that the fibers that he collected from the Jetta are common fibers. You can find those anywhere. And the fibers that he examined from Sierra Lamar's clothes are common fibers. Nothing unique about them. The colors are not unique. There's nothing like that. So, let's talk about the jeans. And I want to talk to you about this idea that there was dragging. I mean, there's no question when you look at the jeans and you figure that this was at the bus stop that some type of violence occurred. But you're not going to hear an expert for the prosecution come in and say there's drag marks on those jeans. In fact, you're going to hear from a defense expert who examined these looking for drag marks. And there's no evidence of drag marks. And let me explain to you what they're going to say. When a person is wearing jeans and they're on the floor and they're actually dragged, I mean, what happens is dirt gets pushed into the fibers. It's a type of a spandex material in the jeans as well. So, you would expect that dirt gets pushed in there. And then when the jeans come off, they get locked into the, the dirt gets locked into the fibers. And this expert, Ethan Groves is his name, he examined the jeans under magnification. And he didn't see any evidence that there was any type of dirt trapped in those fibers. And then he's going to tell you also that he looks for directionality. And that's a way you can tell if there's drag marks. And there was no evidence of directionality. So there was no dragging. This isn't really an important fact, but when we're examining the evidence, it's important to get the facts straight. And that's one fact that we're going to get straight. So let's talk about the jeans. They did some analysis and I want to talk to you about the type of testing they did on the jeans. They took swabs and they tested many areas of the jeans. And you're going to hear that they obtained what's called cuttings. Some of them were cuttings, what means they cut a piece of the fabric out and they tested it. The limitations of doing a cutting, as opposed to a swab, is that you don't know if the DNA came from the inside of the jeans, the outside of the jeans, or a combination of both. So they tested cuttings, they tested the waistline, the zipper, various areas of the jeans. And what the prosecutor didn't tell you is they found sperm cells on these jeans. There were sperm cells on the jeans and they were tested for DNA. And the results were that Mr. Garcia Torres' DNA was excluded from the sperm cells that were collected from the jeans. So this idea about masturbation that he brought up, it's not supported in the evidence. And while I brought that up, let's talk about that really quick to get it out of the way. This thought that Mr. Garcia Torres says that when he's in his car, he has alone time, it was embarrassing to say, but that he masturbated. That's not something that actually, other than to try to say that this is sensational. That's not evidence that helps the prosecution. What this evidence of masturbation, what it does, and what it's going to prove in this case, it's going to prove an alibi for Mr. Garcia Torres. Because as you're going to see that no one is going to come forward and say they saw Mr. Garcia Torres in the area of Sierra Lamar's bus stop, in the area where the phone was at, in the area of where her clothes were found. Not a single witness, no evidence is going to come into place in there. And the reason why that's the case is because if you take this idea that he's somewhere alone masturbating, that would explain why nobody saw him. So to just bring that out and throw that out there, that doesn't prove it. So let's go back and let's talk about, we were talking about, he was excluded from the samples on the genes that were, from the sperm cells that were found on the genes. So there was these cuttings that were taken from the back pocket area, and they were tested, DNA was extracted from them. And we're going to hear from an expert, a DNA expert who talks about transfer. They're going to tell you everything you need to know that's relevant to this case about this type of DNA and how it's transferred. She's going to explain to you that this is skin cell or contact DNA, how it's transferred from person to person, how it's transferred from person to object, and vice versa. And saying this right now and looking at you, I can't forget jury selection and how that microphone was being passed around. And perhaps we would discuss that with this expert. So she's going to educate us on how skin cells work, and how the process of transfer works. And you're going to hear that when skin cells' DNA gets on a surface, it's not easily cleaned. It can survive being wiped. It can survive being washed with soap and water. And you're going to hear that labs, they use special cleaners to clean DNA, to eliminate it so that it doesn't survive a wipe down. And even then, even when you use these special cleaners, lay down the paper, and you take all the precautions, even then contamination happens. And she's going to explain all that to you. She's going to explain how, give you definitions of the type of DNA evidence we have in this case. You're going to hear from various experts in this case. They're going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. And you're going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. And I'm going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. And I'm going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. And I'm going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. And I'm going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. And what a likelihood ratio is. And I'm going to talk to you about what a likelihood ratio is. It's a theory that assumes two hypothesis. It doesn't say it's a mass. It will not say that a person's DNA is present in a mixture. A high likelihood ratio can exist, even if the mass was pure coincidence. And then also, a likelihood ratio is not going to tell you if there's contamination. And the reason why likelihood ratios are used, you're going to learn. Oftentimes, you don't have everyone's profile. You might only have one person's profile. So, sometimes you don't even have a full profile. And because you don't have the full profile, you have to use likelihood ratios. So, let's talk about the studies that were taken in this case. And this is important to know the full story about what's going on with these cuttings. So, Area 5EC was a cutting that was taken from the back pocket of Sierra Lamar's genes. This was tested for DNA. The sample came back. And what the analyst did was she had a hypothesis. And her hypothesis was that there was three people in the mixture. And this is what the prosecutor, the numbers he presented to you. But what you didn't hear is that from the same testing that this criminalist conducted, there was another test that was conducted. It's called YSTR, or Male Specific DNA Test. And we're referring to the 5EC sample. The YSTR test is a type of DNA testing that just searches for male DNA. And you're going to learn that it's a more sensitive test. And that she performed this test on that same sample that she said there was three people. And remember the hypothesis that she used was that Sierra Lamar, Antolin Garcia-Torres, and an unknown. And she came up with a number. But when she ran the YSTR from that same run, it came back as three males. In other words, she found through a different test that there was at least three males in that profile. So if Sierra Lamar is present in her own genes, there has to be three males. So it's a four-person mixture. And she doesn't want to use that. That's because it devastates her or it shows that her hypothesis was wrong. And this is important because the testing that the lab was using at that time renders results from a four-person mixture as inconclusive. In other words, 5EC is inconclusive because we know, based on all the testing that was done by the same analyst, that it was a four-person mixture, and their validation studies would make a four-person mixture inconclusive. So that's why she's saying it's a three-person mixture because as a four, it's inconclusive. And let me explain to you what inconclusive means. When you say a mixture is inconclusive, that means Mr. Garcia-Torres cannot be included. You cannot say that his DNA is in that mixture, and he cannot be excluded either. You can't say he's not in that mixture. So in other words, it's inconclusive. So that's 5EC. Let's talk about area 12. In area 12, what we have is same thing. She tested the area. And here, she believes that it's a two-person mixture. And she runs the hypothesis. It's Sierra Lamar and Antelene Garcia-Torres versus two unknown. And guess what? Mr. Garcia-Torres was excluded from that sample. And you're going to hear this from their own witnesses. So what she does is she changes the hypothesis to Sierra Lamar, Antelene Garcia-Torres, and an unknown. And then that way, she could get her results. So this is the type of hypothesis that's going on where theories are coming out. And when there's theories that favor the defense, you go to the next theory. And let's talk about area 13. Area 13-- [01:47:17] Speaker 4: I objected that argument. Syspane is a stricken philosopher. [01:47:23] Speaker 3: This one was the one that came up with, I believe, 2,400. And this is the hypothesis where Sierra Lamar, Antelene Garcia-Torres, and an unknown versus two unknowns. And it came up with a statistic of 2,400. So you're going to see, based on what these print lists, including the prosecutor's own witnesses, are going to say that those statistics really aren't that high. So let's go over some of the evidence, some more evidence, about the red Jetta when it was processed. This would have been at the sheriff's garage. This would be on April 9th and 10th. So there was some evidence discussed with you earlier about the Jetta being searched over a couple of days and that things in the car were being processed. So you're going to hear that when they go to this sheriff's garage, you know, they don't start off with a clean circuit. You're going to see pictures and you're going to hear the evidence that it's in a garage with a dirty floor. And they lay down the white paper there. And let's see a picture of that. So they start with a dirty floor and they put down this white paper and they start piling things from the car on that paper. You can see there, I don't know if that's like some kind of absorbent material that was already on the floor. They can, they'll explain to you what that is. But it doesn't belong there. Then more importantly, you're going to hear from these same criminalists who were processing the car. They're going to tell you that they were walking across the street to their lab. And in that lab, that's where they were working on Sierra Lamar's items. Her hair brushed and clothes, things belonging to her. And they're walking back and forth from the lab to the garage. From the lab where they've been working on Sierra Lamar's items with DNA on it. And they're going back to the lab. So between April 9th and 10th, they're going back and forth from the sheriff's garage to their lab where they were working on Sierra Lamar's items. And this is something that's important. Let's go back to Sergeant Randall. This is the guy who processed the bag at a substation over in Morgan Hill, at the command post in Morgan Hill. What he did was, he was photographing all the clothes. And at the end when he was done, he found nine hairs on that cork board or nine hairs that came off of her clothes. He didn't know where they came from, but he chose to collect them. And he took those hairs and he put them in an envelope, labeled it nine hairs from the property or from the bag. I think that's what he said. And then he submits these into evidence. These hairs go to the same criminalists that are processing the car. They're in this criminalist's lab. And it's Melissa Dupi is her name. You're going to hear that when she gets this envelope, she opens it up and she processes the hairs to see, you know, put them on slides. And so it's an envelope that she receives that says nine hairs and she processes eight hairs. And then when asked, where was the other hair? She doesn't know. She doesn't know what happened to the other hair. So what that tells you, and you're going to hear this from the expert, is that hairs get lost in the lab. Hairs get lost in the lab. That happens. It's the nature of the business. And, you know, contamination happens in the lab. Again, it happens. And again, this is the same criminalist that's walking back and forth from her lab and processing the car. So Mr. P, she's the one who handled these hairs. She handled other hairs, a hairbrush belonging to Sierra Lamar, as well as other items. And she's one of the criminalists who was at the garage processing the car for two whole days, the ninth and the tenth. So let's talk about that hair that was recovered from the white rope. This was a white rope that was in the trunk of Mr. Garcia Torres' car. And what you're going to find is that this white rope, you're going to see that there's picture overlays that we did. I'm going to explain to you why that's important. So when this car is being processed on April 9th and 10th, the job of the officers there, it's not just police officers there who are taking stuff into evidence. There are criminalists there. Mr. P is there and there's another criminalist there. And what they're doing is they're looking for trace evidence. They're looking for any type of evidence that would be useful. But there's also sheriff officers there that are collecting the evidence and they're processing it and putting it into evidence. And you're going to hear that their job is to document the condition of the evidence when they're collecting it. And by documenting it means besides writing it in a report, they take good quality pictures of the evidence. Because they want to show the condition of the evidence when it was taken, the condition of the object when it was taken into evidence. And the criminals are there in case they see anything important. Like the hair. Like to collect the hair. And you're going to hear from these criminals that when they were processing the car on the 9th and the 10th, they were collecting trace evidence, including hairs. That was their job. They'll collect the hair if they saw it. And here none of them saw any hairs or hair on that white rope. And you're going to hear that there was no hair there. And then later, about four months later, when they opened up the evidence bag, Eureka, there's a hair there. So what's important about this, and this is why this picture is important, is you're going to hear from a forensic image analyst examiner. Her name is Betsy Barkle. What she's going to tell you is she did picture overlays. She took the pictures from when the evidence was collected into evidence, the picture that showed no hair on it. And she made an overlay with the picture that had the hair on it. And what she's going to tell you is that she was able to identify the exact knot that had the hair on it four months later. So she does this overlay, and she can show that that same location where there was a hair four months later did not have a hair on it when they collected the evidence. And she does other types of analysis to confirm that, looking at different filters and things of that nature. I'm going to let her explain that to you. But just as important is this photograph here. This is on top, you're going to see the photograph where there's no hair. And then on the bottom, that's the picture of when they find the hair on that rope. But what's interesting about these pictures, if you see the top photographs, and you see the loops, there's numbers there that were put there when they examined. And when I say put there, the expert did this. What's interesting about this, if you look at the condition of the rope on top when it was collected into evidence, and then you look at the same rope on the bottom, you'll see it appears different. It appears as if it was recoiled. And you're going to hear from the experts, they're going to say nobody messed with it. But we know that's not true. The picture speaks for itself. So let's talk about some more evidence that was collected from the Red Jetta. And this is another, this is in regards to the gloves. So we're going to talk about two different gloves here. There's the gray, and I'm going to say gray and black, or gray and darker gray, mechanic gloves. And then we're going to talk about some cloth gloves. I'm going to show you both of them in just a minute. But what you're going to find is there's no picture of these mechanic gloves with the set of cloth gloves inside. There's not going to be any pictures of those. And what you're going to see is this picture here. And if you look to the right, kind of up on top, you can see what looks like a gray set of gloves sitting there. And the officer is going to tell you that those gloves have another set of gloves inside of them. Yet, you're not going to see any pictures of that. And then let me show you another picture. This is again, items that were placed on the floor. And there was the white paper. If you look at the bottom right, there's a set of gloves there. And those gloves, I mean, you're going to decide for yourself by looking at these gloves, whether there's another set of gloves inside. And then you look at the cloth gloves. So what the officer is going to say is that these cloth gloves were inside those gloves when they were collected. But you're not going to see any photographs that show that. So that's something that you're going to have to decide. And these are the gloves where they're saying that the mechanic gloves that I showed you earlier, they're tested for DNA. There's no DNA belonging to Sierra Lamar on the inside of those gloves, on the outside of those gloves. But they're saying that on these gloves, they found some DNA that could be consistent, or she's included in that profile. So there's problems with these gloves. It's like we don't know how they were pulled out of those mechanic gloves, and we're not going to have any pictures of that. So before we go to the next slide, I want to talk to you about the red Jetta. You heard evidence about some DNA that was collected from the Jetta. There were some pretty high numbers that you saw. But you didn't have the full picture. And you're going to get the full picture throughout the course of the evidence. So what you're going to hear is that when this car is being processed on April 9th and 10th, it takes two days, they develop a plan, a protocol. And the plan is, and you're going to hear them, they're going to testify that they're pulling out stuff from the car, they're examining it, they're packaging it into evidence over the course of two days. Once they're done with that, you're going to hear that what they end up doing is they look for trace evidence, they use alternate light sources to look for stains, they vacuum the car to pull up any type of trace evidence that might be in there. They do tape pulls all over the car. They're doing all kinds of processing like that. And while they're doing that, they don't do fingerprints because they don't want to contaminate the car. You're going to hear how they always do fingerprints last. Because if you think about it, when you have a fingerprint brush, it's like painting in it. You don't do that. You don't do that. So what they do is they wait until the end, and this is the tent. And they take swaps, four swaps, S1, 2, 3, and 4. And they swab the interior of the car for DNA samples. So after they're done doing that, then in comes the fingerprint guys. Two sets of fingerprint guys come over the course of several days, and they dust for prints. And they're looking for any other type of evidence that could be helpful in the case. While that's being done, the criminalists, what they do is they have those four swaps that they took. And they test the DNA. And they come back inconclusive. None of it is useful. So what they decide to do is because the DNA failed, they go back a month later, and they take more swaps. And if you see the pictures that the prosecution showed you of the evidence, you could actually see dust from the fingerprint testing. Because after people were working in the car, including fingerprint analysts or examiners, they go back later and they take more swaps. And then they say, well, Sierra Lamar is included in these swaps a month later when they retest everything. So that's the evidence you're going to have a chance to look at and decide whether there was contamination. And whether proper protocols were followed. Because that's going to be important. So let's talk about some more evidence. And you heard evidence about buying bleach and a turkey baser. It seems kind of like an odd thing to buy. Let's talk about the bleach, first of all. The bleach, you're going to hear evidence of Mr. Garcia Torres' Safeway Club card records. There was nothing secret about buying this bleach. He wanted his discount. And he used his Safeway card for that. And if you look at his records, you're going to see that he regularly buys bleach. And that you're going to hear evidence that there's a laundry facility there where he lives in the trailer park area. But there's also, he also does laundry or his girlfriend does laundry at her mother's house, which is in Morgan Hills as well. So this idea that there's something mysterious about buying bleach at night, that's not going to actually help the prosecution. What you're going to learn is actually that's something that's going to help the defense. That evidence is going to help the defense. And let me tell you why. So the vehicle was searched for bleach. And we're all familiar with what bleach does. If you get bleach on your clothes, if you get bleach on your carpet, it's going to leave a stain. It's going to discolor that area. And they examined Mr. Garcia Torres' red jetta for bleach staining. And there was none. They examined his clothes from the videos and clothes that he had at home to see if there was any type of bleach staining. And there was none. So that evidence of the bleach is not going to prove anything. If anything, it's going to help the defense. But let's talk about the turkey baster. That's the weird one, right? You wonder why he would be buying a turkey baster. You're going to hear from Anthony Garcia Torres as his friend. His name is Danny Fernandez. He's going to tell you that him and Mr. Garcia Torres, on a previous occasion, they made cannabis wax or oil. And he's going to explain how they did it. They had like a PVC pipe. They put marijuana in it. And then you use like a butane, like a lighter refiller thing. And you spray it in there with coffee filter on the end. And you extract oil that can be later smoked. And he's going to tell you how they did that with the PVC pipe. And it made a mess. It didn't really work properly. Then you're going to hear from a cannabis expert. His name is Chris Conrad. He's going to tell you how cannabis wax oil can be made with a turkey mixer. And he'll explain the process. What you do is you take the knob on. You fill it up with marijuana. You put a coffee filter over it. And you can either use zip ties or you can use a hose clamp to secure the coffee filters. And then on the other side, that's where you would put the tip of that butane. And you spray it. And you put it under pressure in the chemical reaction. And out comes oil. And he's going to tell you the benefits of doing it this way. The other thing is if you buy an inexpensive turkey baster, you don't have to clean up the mess. Like the mess that Danny Fernandez talked about. You just throw away the turkey baster with the used marijuana inside and the used filter on it. You can just toss that. So that's going to be evidence that's presented. That's going to show you why a 21 year old would be buying a turkey baster. Lay that down. So then I want to show you -- there's enough time. I'm going to show you a photograph. And then I want to show you some videos. So this is a photograph of Mr. Garcia-Torres. This is around -- to be more exact, it's 12:49 PM on March 16th. This is him on his way home after going fishing. He goes to the bank to cash his check. You're going to hear that at this bank there are high quality cameras. They're filming him from every direction. You can assess his behavior at the bank. You can assess his appearance at the bank. You'll have the chance to look at his clothes, look at his shoes. You can see if he has any injuries on him, scratches to his face. Anything that's consistent with the violent struggle. And you're going to see there are none. You're going to have the opportunity to look at his clothes. To see if his clothes were all muddy or dirty in any way from a violent struggle. And you're not going to see that. You're going to have a chance to see his demeanor in the bank. And there's nothing unusual going on there. So let's get to that. Let's play those videos for you. So you can see what's going on. So you're going to see there's-- this is a bunch of different things. [02:07:04] Speaker ?: So you're going to see there's-- this is a bunch of different things. So you're going to see there's-- there's a bunch of different things. So you're going to see there's-- there's-- there's a bunch of different things. [02:07:11] Speaker 3: And the reason why I wanted to see this, you can see on the top right Mr. Garcia Torres in his distinctive red jet pulling up to the bank. Parking in a particular spot. Parking in a particular spot. And if that lady would get out of the way, I'd see that. If you could stop it there. So if we look at the middle right photograph, you can see his car. You're going to get full videos of this in evidence. And what's important about seeing pictures of his car is you're going to be able to assess for yourself. You're going to see the evidence to see if there's anything that looks out of place in this car. For example, like mud from driving off road on a dirt road. Whether there was, you know, anything about that car that-- that seemed suspicious. And you're going to see none. So I want to show you some more videos of the inside of the bank. So we're going to start off with the first video which shows him walking into the bank. You can look at him from head to toe. And I'm not playing the full video. We'll play more of the videos during the other day. And when you see the full video on this one, you're going to see he goes into the bank. And then he goes back to his car and gets something from his car, an ID or something. And it comes back in and it catches his check. We're going to look at some videos of when he's actually at the teller. So this is another video of him at the teller. You have a chance to see his face, see his arms, examine his clothes. So we're going to go to the next video. So we're going to go to the next video. So this is a video of Mr. Graciatorre walking into the bank. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. [02:11:17] Speaker ?: So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. [02:11:50] Speaker 2: So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. [02:11:52] Speaker ?: So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. [02:12:24] Speaker 4: So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. So you can see him again from head to toe. [02:12:27] Speaker 3: So one more area that's going to be discussed. There's going to be evidence presented regarding cell phone towers. Experts that deal with cell phone forensics. And one of the things that these experts are going to testify about. The defense will call Robert McGuire who will testify. And this is important testimony. But mainly for the fact that Sierra Lamar's phone when it was found in that field. We do call detail record reports to see what's going on with that phone. And what you're going to learn is that that morning after she goes to school. That the phone goes off network. And what that means for I think until around 11 o'clock. Something like that. The experts will explain this all. That there's no communication going on with the phone. In other words no one's trying to call her or text her. So we don't know if the phone is actually in service or not. But then later that morning you're going to find that the phone is either turned off. In airplane mode. Or not connected to the network. And this is something that's going to be a little bit unusual. Because later on in the evening you're going to see that the phone actually goes back. on the network. And then it goes off network again. And at some point it goes back on again. So they're going to discuss this. But what's important to know about this is sometimes phones, you know, they barely get reception. And then other times they don't get reception. And I think that's what's going on and that's what the experts are going to testify about. So let me wrap it up. And I want to talk to you about what the evidence in this case is going to show. It's going to show an impossible timeline. That it's going to show that there was an alternate suspect in this case. When we talk about, you know, what happened or we're looking for answers in this case. And we have an eyewitness. We have a solid timeline. And it's all I'm going to show to you. If you follow this timeline and you break it down, you're going to see it's an impossible timeline. What that means is Mr. Garcia Torres could not have committed the acts that the prosecution is accusing them of. But just as important, besides looking at the evidence that's presented, it's important to look at the evidence that's not presented. And that goes to the charge of murder. Evidence is not going to be presented to you. That's going to show that Sierra Lamar was killed. And at the end, when you evaluate all this evidence of what happened on the morning of March 16th of 2012, you're going to see that the only fair, just, and honest verdict you can reach in this case is not good. Thank you. [02:15:48] Speaker 4: Yeah, thank you, Mr. Lopez. And thank you to our jury. Every single person has paid attention and focused throughout the entire first day. I appreciate that. We are going to break until 9 o'clock tomorrow morning. Please, uh, recall your date again tomorrow morning at the jury assembly room. And we will bring you up as a group. I think we were a little bit better on timing. Um, and we're going to continue to work on it until you're brought up at night. Um, please, uh, remember my admonition. Do, do not talk about the case or about any of the people or any subject involved in it with anyone, including the other jurors. Do not make up your mind about the verdict or any issue until after you discuss the case with the other jurors during deliberations. Have a wonderful night. See you tomorrow morning. And the jury should be first. Oh, I'm sorry. And, uh, leave, uh, all the paper that was on your chair behind. It's going to be a secure phone. Bye. [02:16:49] Speaker ?: Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye. Bye.