This DA Proved the Defense's Case for Them

[00:00:00] Speaker 1: Is that person sitting in the courtroom today? Yes, I believe so. Can you please put them out by describing an article of clothing they are wearing and where they are sitting? [00:00:09] Speaker 2: Sorry, that glare over here. I believe he's wearing a gray suit with a pink tie. [00:00:21] Speaker 3: I asked for a oral limiting instruction when there is testimony about the phone. That was damaged seven days earlier. Essentially, just that the jurors are to consider that and evaluating the aggregate and damage amount and not in determining whether or not. Mr. Brazil is guilty of committing the crime of criminal mischief as an act of domestic violence on this particular day. [00:00:48] Speaker 4: So, I believe that the elemental in the instructor says in a course of a single criminal episode. So that's not a single criminal episode that something happened at 7 days earlier isn't silly, but the charge itself defines that. But I think in the context of what happened that day, I don't. I mean, it may be prejudicial, but I think that the D. A. should be able to get into the. Why they were going to that shop, put some context in there. So, but so I'll deny that request. All right, let's bring the dream. And I'll give you a 10 minutes for opening. All right, we'll proceed with opening statements. I've getting each side 10 minutes for the prosecution. Thank you. For the prosecution, thank you. [00:01:39] Speaker 5: You mean. You mean. You broke her phone up. Broke her glasses. [00:01:47] Speaker 1: Broke her passenger car window. He assaulted her two. Today we're here to discuss the conduct of Mr. Isaac Resinio on the day of July 7th or July 11th, 2025. That day, he was with his partner at the time, Miss Angelique Martinez. He became angry. He became violent. He began to punch Miss Martinez in the face, cutting her nose on the glasses that she was wearing. And he punched the passenger window with enough force to break it on the inside of the car. You'll also show you evidence those 2 law enforcement officers investigate this case. They took pictures of these injuries in the broken window. And they recorded Mr. Resinio himself, talking to them on body more camera that was on and recording during their arrest. I'm just presenting. And you'll hear it for yourself. He told law enforcement this fight happened because they were driving to face a phone that he broke. They're going to ask you to make a decision in this case. They're going to ask you to watch the video again. Go through all of the evidence that you've heard today. And come to the only just verdict there is in this case. Ask me to find him guilty next to the jury. [00:03:09] Speaker 5: because he broke her phone, broke her glasses, broke her car window. He assaulted her too. Thank you. For the defense. Thank you. [00:03:24] Speaker 3: You will hear Miss Martinez tell you that Mr. Resinio repeatedly punched her in the face with a closed fist, struck her hard enough to bust her nose, slammed her head into the side of the car, broke a car window, broke her keys, and stole her phone and wallet before walking away. Those are serious allegations, but serious allegations were required serious proof. She's composed, she answers officers' questions, she's not hysterical, she's not crying. Her demeanor is not consistent with someone who has just experienced a brutal assault that she said she just experienced. And when officers contacted Mr. Rosinio just a short time later, they photographed his hands. You would expect if someone had just punched a car window and punched someone hard enough to bust their nose, they'd have some sort of injury on their hands. Mr. Rosinio didn't. You will see those photographs. There are no injuries consistent with someone who had just punched another person multiple times, punched through a car window, and broken his broken keys with his hands. If anyone had fresh injuries on their hands, you will see consistent with striking something, it was Ms. Martinez. The evidence points in one direction. You'll also hear Ms. Martinez accused Mr. Rosinio of stealing her phone and stealing her wallet. Officers never found either item on Mr. Rosinio, and that's because he never took it. In fact, while officers are with Ms. Martinez at her home investigating, she all of a sudden, look, it's her phone that she says Mr. Rosinio took in Columbia. You'll hear that. It had never been stolen. Those allegations, that didn't happen. This was the end of a failing relationship, not the violent assault that Ms. Martinez said. And because of this, at the end of this trial, my co-counsel, Mr. Chisholm, is going to stand where I'm standing and ask that you return the only verdict consistent with the evidence, the lack of evidence and the law, and that is the verdict of not guilty. Thank you. [00:06:01] Speaker 5: Can you call first witness? Yes, sir. The people call Angelique Martinez to stand. Okay. [00:06:11] Speaker 4: The witness has affirmed the oath, sworn in. Ma'am, once you're seated, just state your full name for the record. Spelling your last name. Martinez Angelique. Can you spell that last name? M-A-R-T-I-N-E-Z. Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Meineke. Good morning, Ms. Martinez. Good morning. Now, before we begin talking about what [00:06:53] Speaker 1: happened in this case today, I want to ask you a few questions for the jurors to get to know you better. Where do you work? I'm currently unemployed. I'm sorry, can you say that? I'm currently unemployed. Okay. And how long have you lived here in Colorado? My whole life. Now, do you want to be here testifying today? No. Why not? It's hard to talk about. Okay. Now, do you see the man who assaulted you here in the courtroom today? I do. Could you please point out by an article of his clothing and where he is currently sitting? [00:07:31] Speaker 6: To the right of me with a black button-up shirt. Let the record reflect the witness has properly [00:07:36] Speaker 1: identified the defendant. The record will still reflect. All right, Ms. Martinez, let's get into why we're here today. Where were you on the morning of July 11th, 2025? [00:07:47] Speaker 6: I believe I was at my house. I'm headed to the phone store. And at this point in time, [00:07:53] Speaker 1: what was your relationship like with Mr. Isaac Fresenio? We were in a relationship. It was sexual. Okay. How long were you guys together? Roughly two years. And that morning, did you have any plans that you had set with Mr. Fresenio? Yes. What was that plan? To get a new phone. [00:08:11] Speaker 6: Why are you guys going to get a new phone? He had broke my previous phone. So when you arrived at [00:08:17] Speaker 1: location and there's no T-Mobile there, how did Mr. Fresenio react to that? He was upset. [00:08:25] Speaker 6: Why was he upset? Because he had told me that there was another store that was nearby [00:08:30] Speaker 1: that was a T-Mobile store. Okay. And did you ever end up making it to that other T-Mobile store? I did not. [00:08:37] Speaker 6: Why not? We ended up getting into an altercation. What kind of things happened when you say he became physical? He started to become violent with me, started hitting me, things like that. [00:08:50] Speaker 1: Where in particular was he hitting you at? I would say from my waist up. Okay. Just kind of, [00:08:59] Speaker 6: I would say swinging at me. Okay. So sounds like multiple hits? Correct. Did those hits cause you [00:09:06] Speaker 1: any pain? Yes, they did. Did you receive any injuries because of your glasses being broken that morning? Yes, it did bust my nose. Okay. And when you say it busted your nose, what would you like elaborate a [00:09:18] Speaker 6: little more about that? I had a mark on my face from it, turned into a bruise. [00:09:28] Speaker 1: And was there any other of your property there that was broken? Yes, my car window. And how did that [00:09:34] Speaker 6: car window get broken? Mr. Fresenio punched it several times. Which car window was that to be [00:09:40] Speaker 1: precise? It was the passenger side. And so that was the side that was opposite of where you were at the [00:09:45] Speaker 6: time? Yes. And how did he punch that? He just kind of swung back and punched it. Okay. Okay. That [00:09:55] Speaker 1: fully breaks the window that you punched his hand through the window? No, it just shattered the window, but it was still intact. Okay. And at what point did he finally decide to get out of the car? Once he had [00:10:08] Speaker 6: taken my keys, took in my keys and stole my wallet. Okay. Now, at that point, what did he do after leaving [00:10:14] Speaker 1: the car? He began to walk away. Now, did you pay any money to replace your glasses here in this case? Yes. [00:10:24] Speaker 6: And how much did you pay? Roughly $160. And how much did you pay to replace your phone here? It was about [00:10:30] Speaker 1: $400. Was there anything else? Well, I guess you mentioned your window was broken. Have you paid [00:10:37] Speaker 6: to replace your window? I have not. Why not? I just haven't been able to afford it. And how much were you quoted to replace it? I believe it was around $200. Okay. Thank you, Ms. Martinez. No further [00:10:48] Speaker 1: questions, Your Honor. House examination? Yes, Your Honor. Morning, Ms. Martinez. Morning. We've got a few questions for you. All right. So when it turned physical, you said that Mr. Bresigno hit you multiple times? Correct. With a closed fist? Yes. You also told police that he punched your window and you told us that he punched your window multiple times? Yes. Causing it to crack? Yes. All right. But did any of those people that started notice, [00:11:18] Speaker 6: they never came up and talked to you? I think that they were frightened by Mr. Bresigno, too frightened to [00:11:25] Speaker 1: approach him. Okay. But even after he left, they didn't come to talk to you? I left right after it happened. But when you were looking for your keys, nobody came up and talked to you? Not while I was in my car, no. Okay. And on direct, you said that you were looking for your keys so that you could get away. But you told police that while Mr. Bresigno was walking off, you drove up to him? Well, I drove past him while I was going home. You told him that you stopped and yelled at him. Yelled things at him. Yelled things at him? Yeah, Mr. Bresigno, you stopped while he was walking and you yelled things out your window to him? I did ask for [00:12:02] Speaker 6: my wallet, yes. So you did stop and walked off? I didn't stop. I just was like, where's my wallet? [00:12:06] Speaker 1: I'm calling the police. Okay. And, you know, this was after, you know, he hit you multiple times and broke your window? Yes. You also told police that when you stopped and were yelling at Mr. Bresigno that [00:12:24] Speaker 6: he took his shirt off? While he was walking away, he did take his shirt off, yes. So that police [00:12:29] Speaker 1: wouldn't be able to identify him? Correct. You also told police that he stole your wallet and phone? Um, just my wallet. You didn't tell police that he stole your phone? When they arrived at first, [00:12:39] Speaker 6: I couldn't find my phone at first. So I thought he had taken it, but he didn't. But you did tell them [00:12:46] Speaker 1: that when they first got there that he stole your phone? Um, I believe I told him that I thought he might have my phone. And like you just said, you did end up finding your phone while the police tracked your home? Correct. Um, there was also a moment that you tell the police that you may have [00:13:02] Speaker 6: scratched Mr. Bresigno while defending yourself? Um, they had asked me if I had hit him and I said yes, [00:13:08] Speaker 1: in self-defense I did. Um, they told you that there was a scratch on his face? I don't think so. Okay. Um, police also asked you about Mr. Bresigno's glasses? Um, they did ask me about them. And you told them that during the argument he smashed the glasses off his own face? I don't recall that. [00:13:29] Speaker 5: Would it refer to memory to see body cam from that day? Um, sure. [00:13:38] Speaker 1: Um, so that's the first question. It did. So did you tell the police that Mr. Bresigno snapped the glass off his own face? After he broke mine, yes. That's what I want to talk about when the police came in and talked to you at your house. Um, so the police did come and they spoke to you at your home. Um, uh, you just need a verbal answer. Um, and that was about 20 minutes after you called the police? Exactly, yes. Uh, they didn't meet you where the incident happened? No, I had already left. Right, because you had already left the area. Um, and again, the areas where you said that Mr. Bresigno, uh, assaults you. Yes, sir. Now I want to talk about, uh, a pending case you have. Um, you're currently being Jackson, your honor. Irrelevance and 403. Um, the price of folks. All right. So you're currently being prosecuted by this district attorney's office, uh, office that is county district attorney office. Correct. Um, for violation of the protection order. Correct. Um, and in that protection order, you're the restrained party. Correct. Mr. Bresigno is the protective partner. Correct. And it's a permanent protection order. I'm unsure. Um, and that protection order prevents you from having contact with Mr. Bresigno. That's enough. That's enough. Um, and you are aware that what you say here can impact that case. Correct. Um, and you're facing up to 120 days in jail for this charge. Jackson, your honor. Irrelevance. Overruled. Uh, and you know that the district attorney's office has the same what happens in your case. I do. Including if there's a plea offer given to you. I do. And what the punishment will be in that plea offer. I do. And the DA's office will also recommend a punishment if you go to trial and are unsuccessful. Correct. Now I want to talk about some conversations you have with the DA's office following the incident. Um, you spoke with the DA's office a couple of times after the incident. Yes. One being on December 23rd, 2025. I'm unsure of the date. Would you say probably around that? Sure. And that's five months after the incident happened. Yes. One of the things you told the interviewer was that there was another call reporting domestic [00:16:14] Speaker 6: violence at the same location? Um, I believe there could have been, but I wasn't sure. [00:16:21] Speaker 1: And you told the interviewer this was because when you had gotten out of the car, you had screamed? [00:16:26] Speaker 6: Um, yeah, I was screaming during the incident. Yes. And then as you were driving away, you heard police going to the location. You were just. I did hear police in the background. You also told the interview [00:16:35] Speaker 1: that you had two black and blue eyes following. I did have two black eyes. Yes. Because again, Mr. Bristinho had hit you multiple times in the face with a closed fist. Correct. But you didn't have any pictures of them. I did. You did? Yes. And okay. And did you send those to the district attorney's office? I did. And just one more time, the police talked to you pretty soon after the incident. Yes. But five months later is when you remembered the potential of another call. [00:17:07] Speaker 6: Um, I'm unsure when I remembered that. You also told the interviewer that you never got any medical treatment. [00:17:14] Speaker 1: I did not. Not on the day of the incident. No. Or anytime after. No. No further questions. Thank you. Redirect. Yes, sorry. Hello again, Ms. Martinez. Hello. Now I want to be as clear as possible here. This pending case coming up here, have I or anyone else in my office made you any promises about that case for your testimony today? No. Has anyone from my office spoken to you about any sort of potential benefits you would receive if you testified on this case today? No. Why are you here testifying [00:17:47] Speaker 6: today? Um, to hopefully tell the truth and prevent somebody else from experiencing the same thing. [00:17:54] Speaker 1: During those five months there, were you still in any sort of relationship with Mr. Bristinho? Um, yes. And they, like you said, became your tell the truth, right? Correct. No further questions, Your Honor. We have a brief results examination. On that? Uh, uh, not exactly on what. Yeah. No. All right. Um, [00:18:23] Speaker 4: any questions from the jurors for this witness? Raise your hand. If you have a question. No one has raised your hand. All right. Ma'am, you can step down. Thank you. Thank you. People may call their next witness. [00:18:39] Speaker 5: Yes, Your Honor. The people call Officer Joshua Steenberg. Sir, if you could come over here, please? [00:18:54] Speaker 4: Let's spell up on there. Thank you. Brace your right hand. Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth, under penalty of perjury. That's right. Okay. The witness is affirming the O. Sir, you can be seated now. And after you're seated, just go ahead and state your full name for the record, spelling your last name. [00:19:12] Speaker 7: Joshua Steenberg. Last name, S-T-E-E-N-B-U-R-G-H. All right, go ahead, Councilman. Officer, where do you work? Thornton Police Department. And what's your position with, uh, Thornton Police? I'm a police officer, a field training officer, um, and master police officer. Okay. And, uh, how long [00:19:35] Speaker 1: have you been employed with, uh, with Thornton? I've been with Thornton for almost four years. Okay. And, uh, have you, were you, have you been employed with other, uh, police departments? Yes. Prior to that, [00:19:46] Speaker 7: uh, I was with the Adams County Sheriff's Office as a deputy sheriff for approximately three and a [00:19:51] Speaker 1: half years. Okay. So you've been an officer for about seven and a half years? Yes, sir. Okay. And does your, do your responsibilities include investigating alleged instances of domestic violence? Yes, that is included. Officer, I want to turn back to, uh, July 11th, 2025. Were you working that day? Yes, I was. And did you get a call for service at approximately 10:15 in the morning? Yes, [00:20:14] Speaker 7: I believe we did. And where were you dispatched to? I believe, um, I'd have to refer to my report for [00:20:21] Speaker 1: the original dispatch location. When you arrived, were there other officers with you? Uh, yes. And what [00:20:27] Speaker 7: role did you take on the scene? Uh, I took a primary investigative, investigative role, um, primarily [00:20:35] Speaker 1: speaking with, um, the victim. Okay. And after you spoke with, uh, Ms. Martinez, did you make contact with anyone else related to this case? Um, yes. And who was that? Uh, the defendant, Isaac Prezeno. And is Mr. Prezenio sitting in the, in this courtroom today? Yes. Can you please point out Mr. Prezenio by describing an article, an article of clothing he is wearing and where they, where he is sitting? Uh, [00:21:00] Speaker 7: he's sitting to your left wearing a black button up shirt. Let the record reflect that the witness has identified the defendant. Uh, the record will so reflect identification. When you spoke with Ms. Martinez, did you take any pictures? I know photographs were taken. I don't recall if I myself took the [00:21:20] Speaker 1: photos or another officer on scene. Uh, can you describe the picture that's on the screen of the jury, [00:21:26] Speaker 7: please? Yes, I believe this vehicle is registered to Angelique. Um, this is a picture of her front passenger side window, um, with damage to the window to include, um, kind of a spiderweb style cracking [00:21:41] Speaker 1: throughout. Okay. And could you tell whether the window was broken from inside or outside the car? [00:21:48] Speaker 3: Objection, speculation calls for expert testimony. Sustained unless you can lay the foundation. [00:21:55] Speaker 1: Uh, I'll withdraw your honor. Uh, was there any other, uh, property damage that you investigated when you arrived on the scene? Not that I recall. Okay. And did you relay the, uh, information that you learned on scene to anyone else? Um, yes. And, uh, later in the course of your investigation, did you arrest [00:22:17] Speaker 7: the defendant? Yes. And did you transport him to jail? Uh, yes, I did ultimately transport him to jail. [00:22:23] Speaker 3: There's nothing further. Uh, sub-examination? This supposedly occurred in the parking lot near the Jersey Mike's, correct? Yes. Okay. And that's a public parking lot, to the best of your knowledge? Yes, uh, public has access. Okay. Um, and while you're in Vero, you were advised that Ms. Martinez was the reporting party, correct? Yes. Um, and as far as you're aware, Ms. Martinez was the only reporting party? As far as I'm aware, that's correct. Okay. You didn't receive any information at any point that, um, any other party reported this incident or called in about the incident? I don't recall anything about any other reporting parties. Okay. And you got into this a little bit undirect, but just to clarify, so you received the original dispatch, um, around 10:14 in the morning? That sounds correct. Okay. Um, and Ms. Martinez, uh, said that this happened supposedly around, uh, 9:30 in the morning? I believe so. Okay. And then you spoke with Ms. Martinez around 10:40? I think so. Okay. Um, and you spoke with her at her home? Yes. So I want to talk about, um, these things and the injuries that you observed, uh, on Ms. Martinez. So you saw a, and observed a small mark on the bridge of her nose, correct? Yes. Okay. Um, and we saw that in people's one. Is that a yes? Sorry. Oh, sorry. Yes. Okay. Um, and you also observed a cut on her finger, correct? Yes. Um, and that cut had blood around it? Yes. Okay. Um, Officer Steenberg, I showed you, uh, Defense Exhibit A. Um, do you recognize that? I do. Okay. Um, is that a fair and accurate depiction of the injury, um, you observed to Ms. Martinez's hand on July 11th, 2025? Yes, it is. Okay. Your Honor, at this time, I'd move to admit, um, and publish Defense Exhibit A. No section, Your Honor. Exhibit A is admitted. Okay. So besides those two injuries, you didn't observe any other injuries on Ms. Martinez, correct? Correct. Okay. Um, you didn't observe any bruising? I don't recall seeing any bruising. Um, she didn't have a black eye from what you could see? I don't recall any black eye. Uh, from what you could tell, her nose wasn't broken? From what I could tell. Okay. Um, and you, you did offer her medical attention, correct? I believe so. Um, and she declined that? Yes. [00:24:53] Speaker 7: As to what he specifically told, I know he spoke with them. What they spoke about, I'm unclear. Okay. [00:25:00] Speaker 3: But you, you were aware that he did speak with them? Yes. Okay. Now, when you were speaking with Mr. Brasino, um, you didn't observe any obvious injuries on him, [00:25:12] Speaker 7: correct? I don't recall any obvious injuries. Okay. Um, not on his hands. No, I keep doing that. No, I don't recall seeing any injuries to his hands. Okay. And I want to [00:25:25] Speaker 3: go back a little bit and talk about, um, Ms. Martinez's demeanor. So when you met with Ms. Martinez, um, she was not hysterical. Is that fair to say? It's fair to say she was not hysterical. Um, she wasn't sobbing uncontrollably. She was not. She wasn't unable to talk to you because she was too emotional. That's correct. She was able to talk to me. Okay. And again, you spoke with Ms. Martinez at her home, correct? I did. Um, you didn't go to the location where she said that the argument and the supposed assault happened. I did not. Um, you didn't go and try to find any witnesses who might have seen this alleged assault, correct? I did not. Um, you also, like we talked about earlier, you didn't get a report of any other 911 calls about this? Correct. Okay. Um, and you also didn't collect any camera footage, correct? Correct. Um, so no surveillance footage of that parking lot? [00:26:21] Speaker 7: No surveillance footage from the parking lot. Okay. Um, and just so I'm clear, because I, [00:26:27] Speaker 3: I worded that question poorly. Um, so you didn't go and ask the surrounding businesses if they had that camera footage. I did not. Okay. I don't have anything else. Thank you. Officer Steenberg. Thank you, ma'am. [00:26:39] Speaker 8: Thanks. Any redirect? Uh, thank you, Your Honor. Any questions from the jury for this witness? [00:26:50] Speaker 4: Raise your hand. No one has raised their hand. Go ahead, sir. You can step down. Thank you. Thank you. The prosecution may call as next witness. Yes, Your Honor. The people call Officer McName. [00:27:05] Speaker 5: Sir, if you could come up here, please. [00:27:13] Speaker 4: Step up on that step there. Thank you, sir. Raise your right hand. Swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, under penalty of perjury. I do, yes. All right. Thank you, sir. The witnesses affirm the oath. And, sir, once you see this stage, once you get seated, state your full name for the record, and then spell your last name. [00:27:31] Speaker 2: All right. So my name is Officer William McNamee. Last name is M-C-N-A-M-E-E. [00:27:40] Speaker 1: All right. Go ahead, counsel. Good morning, officer. Good morning. I want to ask you a few questions [00:27:45] Speaker 2: about your background. Where do you work? I work for the Thornton Police Department. And what is your position with Thornton PD? I'm a patrol officer. And how long have you been employed with Thornton PD? Just over three years. And were you an officer anywhere else before? I was, yes. I was at Edgewater for four years. I was at Logan County Sheriff's Office for a year and a half, and Sterling PD for a year and a half. Okay. So you've been a police officer for a little over [00:28:14] Speaker 1: nine years? Yes. Okay. Officer, I want to return to the day of July 11th, 2025. Were you working that day? I was, yes. And [00:28:25] Speaker 2: how did you get involved in this case? Received a dispatch call about a domestic violence incident. And were you given a description of the defendant? I was, yes. We were kind of scattered around and this call came out. It was unique. The individuals we were looking for were not together anymore. So I was alone when I contacted one of the individuals. Is that person sitting in the courtroom today? [00:28:50] Speaker 1: Yes, I believe so. Can you please put them out by describing an article of clothing they are wearing [00:28:57] Speaker 2: and where they are sitting? Sorry, the glare over here. I believe he's wearing a gray suit with a pink tie. And so when you contacted the defendant, what was your understanding of what had happened? Dispatch had said that there was an incident that happened in a car between a male and a female in which dispatch said that the male had punched the female in the face and then got out of the car was walking back towards the female in the house. [00:29:41] Speaker 5: And move to strike, please. Yeah. Sustained. [00:29:50] Speaker 8: You need to disregard the last statement made by this police officer. [00:29:56] Speaker 1: When you made contact with the defendant, what did the defendant tell you it happened? [00:30:03] Speaker 2: The defendant, Isaac, had said he was in an argument with his girlfriend. They were going to get her a new phone. And she told him to get out of the car. He had wanted to go back to her house to get his motorcycle and backpack and asked her to give him a ride. And they continued to argue at which point in time she knocked the glasses off of his face, causing an injury. After that, he ended up getting out of the car and then attempted to walk back to her house to get his belongings. Did the defendant initially say that he wanted to press charges? He said no. Officer, were you wearing body worn camera that day? I was, yes. Was it on and recording? [00:30:52] Speaker 1: It was. And your honor, there's two clips on this disc. We're going to show the first. I'm going to ask a couple more questions and then we'll show the second. Okay. We are now going to play people's exhibit number three. [00:31:06] Speaker 8: Okay. [00:31:09] Speaker 2: So, man, are you Isaac? Yeah, what's up? Okay. I got to talk to you for a second. Sorry. What's happened with you and your lady? Let's get out of the street. [00:31:18] Speaker 9: She dropped me off. She wants me to go by her phone. That's it. What happened? She snagged my glasses off my face. Okay. I'm not pressing charges. I love her. Sure. Well, that's what I'm trying to figure out. She's saying you guys got physical. No. Stopped you out of the car? Yeah, I got out of the car real quick, but I just have to go get my bike and my glasses. Okay. Um, you want to search me? [00:31:42] Speaker 5: Pop a knife right here. Just don't take it out, right? No, no, no. I look at my hands in the air. [00:31:50] Speaker 9: Hold on to it for a second. I broke her phone a while back. She broke my phone. Uh, so now I was taking her to get her phone. We had some altercations. We just argued. Uh, she asked me to get out of the car. Do you want to get out of the car? Do you want to get out of the car? Take me back to my motorcycle. Take me back to my motorcycle. She's over here telling me she's going to it up, mess it up. I'm like, I'm not getting out of your car until you take me to my motorcycle. Okay. So she snatches my glasses off my base and everything. I'm like, you know what? I'm done with you. I'm done at it. And that's why I get out of the car. So now I'm walking this way, you know? So I didn't get my glasses, [00:32:26] Speaker 2: my backpack, my bike. Okay. Did you hit her at all? No, sir. No? Okay. Um, do we have anybody over there? [00:32:34] Speaker 9: Check my hands, everything. I ain't got no one. All right. So what we'll do, we'll probably, [00:32:38] Speaker 2: I got to put you in handcuffs. I'll take you back over there. Um, then we'll get the other side of the story, figure out what's going on. And then as long as everything checks out, [00:32:45] Speaker 1: uh, we'll go from there. Cool. So you later then arrived at the victim's apartment, correct? [00:32:51] Speaker 2: Correct. And while there, did you get the other side of the story? Uh, I did not hear it. I had just heard that, um, the primary officer in this case, officer Steenberg, um, based on the this whole story that he got, uh, determined that Isaac was the offender. So did you then arrest, uh, the defendant? [00:33:11] Speaker 1: Yes. And, uh, did the defendant get to tell his side of the story? Um, I don't believe, [00:33:20] Speaker 2: not to me. All I had had was what I had to hire, already talked to him about on the side of the road. [00:33:26] Speaker 1: Did you tell the defendant that he could tell his side of the story or that he will get the chance to tell his side of the story? I did. Yes. And after he realized he was being charged, [00:33:35] Speaker 2: did he want to press charges? Uh, I believe he did say, um, that if she was going to press charges, he wanted to as well for knocking his glasses off your honor. Uh, at this time, [00:33:48] Speaker 1: we would like to republish, uh, exhibit three to play clip number two. Go ahead. [00:33:56] Speaker 2: So then at this point, based on what the officers inside are saying, um, you are in custody. Okay, I'm not sure if it's for assault or harassment, but we'll get everything figured out. Obviously, you'll have a chance to say your side of the story. I've already got what you told me initially. [00:34:13] Speaker 9: I'm in charge for any domestic or anything. I want her being charged back for snatching my glasses on my face for snatching me because that's not right. I didn't think anything to this and [00:34:24] Speaker 1: that's what you're afraid. Officer, uh, did the defendant have any injuries consistent with, uh, glasses being swiped off of his face? He did. Yes. Nothing perfect. [00:34:40] Speaker 3: Uh, cross-examination? Yes, please. Is it Mac namey? Mac namey. Yes. Mac namey. Yeah. Okay. Good morning, Officer Mac namey. Good morning. Okay. Um, so I want to talk about your involvement in the case. So you were the first person to, um, speak with Mr. Brissigno, correct? Yes. Um, and you were alerted that a suspect matching his description was walking down the road. Correct. And from what you observed, there was nothing unusual about, um, Mr. Brissigno when you saw him walking on the road, correct? No, just that he matched the description that dispatch had given. Okay. You didn't notice that, um, he wasn't wearing a shirt? I'm sorry, what? Let me rephrase the question. His shirt was not off when you contacted him, correct? Correct. Um, his shirt was not missing when you contacted him? No, he was wearing it. He was wearing a shirt. Okay. Okay. And when you first stopped, Mr. Brissigno, um, he told you who he was, right? Yes. Um, he stopped walking to talk to you. Yes. Um, he answered your questions. He did, yes. And he told you what happened? Yes. Um, he told you that when they were arguing, Ms. Martinez reached over and grabbed his glasses off his face and that scratched him, correct? Yes. Okay. Um, and you observed that Mr. Brissigno had dried blood and a small flap of skin, um, rising from his right cheek, correct? Yes. Um, but he didn't [00:36:18] Speaker 2: have any other injuries that you observed? Not that, not that he told me about, no. You didn't observe [00:36:23] Speaker 3: any injuries on his hands? I did not know. Okay. And Mr. Brissigno also wasn't wearing glasses when you contacted him, correct? Correct. Okay. Okay. So, um, you have defense exhibits BNC in front of you. Do you recognize those photos? Uh, I do not. I did not take them. Okay. Um, do you recognize those as Mr. Brissigno's hands? [00:36:51] Speaker 2: I cannot definitively say. I would imagine since they are here that they are his. Okay. Okay. But you [00:36:59] Speaker 3: did observe his hands, correct? Yes. Okay. Um, would these be a fair and accurate depiction of his hands on that date as you observe them? I would imagine so, yes. Okay. Um, Yarder, I would move to admit and published defense exhibits BNC. And, uh, people are going to object to lack of family treatment. Uh, can I'm going to sustain that objection at this point. Um, so I want to talk about Mr. Brissigno's, um, overall demeanor. Is it fair to say that he was very cooperative with you? Yes. Um, he put his hands up and let you search him? Yes. Um, he never fought you? No. Never got upset? Not that I can remember, no. Or confrontational? Not, not confrontational, no. Okay. Um, and you found nothing of note on him, correct? Correct. Just his normal belongings? Yes. Um, you didn't find an extra film on him? Um, not that I remember. No. Okay. Um, or a wallet that was not his. No. Okay. [00:38:25] Speaker 5: I do not have anything additional. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Redirect. Uh, briefly, your honor. [00:38:37] Speaker 2: Officer, you searched, uh, Mr. Brissigno, correct? Um, I was present when the searching was taking place. Yes. Did you find any broken glasses on him? No. [00:38:48] Speaker 4: Nothing further. Any questions from the jury for this witness? [00:38:53] Speaker 8: Raise your hand. No. Sir, you can step down. Thank you. Thank you. [00:39:01] Speaker 5: And you're on. Let's have the people rest. Okay. [00:39:05] Speaker 4: All right. This is a perfect time for lunch. The people have rested their case. All right. The jury is outside the courtroom. All right. Um, any motion for the court? How do you may be seated? [00:39:18] Speaker 1: Well, you're on our defense moves for a judgment of acquittal studying Colorado rule. Colorado rule of criminal procedure 29 and people will be Barnes. The issue is rather the relevant evidence, both direct and circumstantial when viewed as a whole in the light most variable to the prosecution as substantial and sufficient to support a conclusion by a reasonable mind that a defendant is guilty of the charge beyond a reasonable doubt. To start for the criminal mischief, um, the officers testified that they did not see any other property damage besides the, uh, to the window. And I think there's some speculation as to who actually broke the window. Um, Ms. Martinez has, uh, changed her story multiple times of the, from when she first called 911 to her interviews with the district attorney's office, uh, months after, um, she seems to add facts or change things. She got on the one to stand today and said that his phone wasn't stolen. Um, but she clearly told police that he had stolen her phone further. They have not proven that Mr. was guilty of assault in the 3rd degree as an act of domestic violence. Again, both officers, no officer testified to any injuries to Mr. Bruce's hands. Um, actually state the complete opposite for the officers. We're not able to identify Mr. Bruce and you clearly. I mean, I think we saw he, uh, officer McNamee identified me as Mr. Bruce and you, um, and officer McNamee was the person that arrested Mr. Bruce and you in the 1st place. Um, no, no, uh, no judicial obligation is more imperative than the accomplishment of justice due to the lack of evidence to support a guilty verdict. This court should grant the defense's motion for judgment [00:40:47] Speaker 4: of acquittal. Thank you. And since everyone has to tell me what the Bennett standard is every single time, I really appreciate that since I'm going to read it right. But, uh, Ms. Martinez testified, uh, she suffered an injury that was documented with the photograph. She stated that they were in an intimate relationship for 2 years. When this happened, they said they were at the parking lot where she was assaulted numerous times by the defendant, um, that her glasses were broken. You know, one officer couldn't identify the defendant, but 2 witnesses did identify the defendant and Ms. Martinez identified and Mr. Steinberg identified the defendant in this particular case. There's also reference to a Jersey Mike, but that no one ever testified to that. So the court does find sufficient evidence exists considering all the exhibits, all the testimony in this particular case. I didn't see an endorsement of self-defense. Right. Okay. You understand that? Yes. Okay. All right. So we don't have to do that. I can resubmit your instruction. I can do that during lunch. I can remove that. Uh, that's not, that's not an issue. I'll just do those 2 elementals. And Mr. Bucina, speak to your, um, speak to your attorneys about your decision about what you want to do. Okay? Yes, sir. When you come back, I'm going to ask you because the people have rested. I'll say, what is your decision? Okay? Yes. All right. Um, anything the court needs to address from the prosecution? Anything additional for the defense? I know your honor. That's so funny, though, when I did you. Uh, yeah, that's fine. I will tell you, though, it's this damn glass. They're not seeing anything, right? Right. Can you watch the video and say, all right, we'll be in recess. All right. Back in the record. 25. AM 3626. People City, Colorado versus Isaac Brasino. Everyone is present both a defense counsel and defendant. Mr. Brasino, sir, I gave you, um, a little lunch recess there. Um, but, uh, since the people have rested, have you made a decision of whether you're going to testify or not testify? Yes, sir. I came to conclusion that I will not be testifying. Okay. And has anyone forced you to do that? No, sir. It's on my behalf. Yeah. And your story kind of got out through all the body worn camera anymore. You know what I'm saying? But, but that's your decision, right? About not testifying? Yes, sir. That's my decision. All right. The court will accept that decision, the voluntary knowing and intentional decision on your part, and it's his decision. All right. Let's go through the jury instructions. I've given each side 15 minutes for their closing argument. Prosecution, you may proceed with your first part of your closing argument. Thank you, your honor, members of the jury. He broke her phone. Broke her glasses. He broke her car window. [00:43:46] Speaker 1: He assaulted her, too. This chain of actions here is the reason we're here in this courtroom today. Now, there's a lot of talk in this case about changing stories, different events that I'm on here. But injuries don't lie. Bracks on a window that have not changed in the incident here don't have any credibility. What this pain serves to jury is Mr. Resenio thinks of Ms. Martinez as his properties. [00:44:16] Speaker 5: You heard a top projection, your honor. I mean, that's a, I think it's an inappropriate [00:44:25] Speaker 1: characterization of Mr. Resenio's actions. It's closing argument overruled. If you find Mr. Martinez, or Mr. Resenio, excuse me, guilty of his charge here, it's your job to determine how much damage he did. And he heard from Angela Deacon. Those new glasses cost about 150 and the new card window, which she has yet to pay because of costs, another 200 dollars. That there is over 300 dollars. And that should make the decision clear in this case marks the jury. But before this trial is done, I want you to go back to the collaboration room, watch the video again. After you've seen that video, after you've seen the pictures, and after you consider all of the evidence we have here in this case, my co-counselt Mr. Lynch plans to be to find the only verdict that's consistent with the evidence in this case. [00:45:11] Speaker 5: And that is guilty. Thank you. As my co-counselt Mr. Collins saw eloquently coded, and she came up here in Southfield to begin this trial, [00:45:21] Speaker 1: serious allegations are serious proof. Now, this attorney just came up here and made some pretty serious allegations against Mr. Resenio. Even to the extent to say that Mr. Resenio saw Ms. Martinez at this property. That's a pretty serious allegation. But one thing they didn't bring is serious proof. Not only is there a lack of proof, but the proof that they showed does not make any sense. It doesn't add up. We all heard from Ms. Martinez. She claimed that in a parking lot, in a busy shopping center, in a public place, Mr. Resenio, not hit her once, not hit her twice, but multiple times in the face, then proceeded to punch the wind over car multiple times. She said that there were people around that heard it. That's all. And when that happened, Mr. Resenio decided to get out of the car and off the way. She claimed that when she got off the car, she screamed for help, and somebody else saw that and called 911. But we heard from police. There was no other report. But what you also heard her say, when I got up there and cross-examined her, was that she drove by Mr. Resenio. At first, she said she didn't say nothing. She just drove past him. But when I asked her, you told police that you yelled something at him out of your car. She was like, okay, yeah, I did yell something as I drove by. Again, stories changing. Serious allegations require serious proof. Now, we saw the photos of the injuries that Ms. Martinez says were caused by Mr. Resenio. Now, again, she said Mr. Resenio punched her multiple times in the face. She had one scratch on her nose. A scratch where the blood was dropped. Another injury she had, inside her finger right here. That injury, first blood, still wet blood around the finger. She also claimed that following, you know, a few days after, like she told the interview and her interview with the DA's office, that she had bruises, two black eyes on her face. She even had pictures. [00:47:31] Speaker 5: She said she sent those to the attorney's office. [00:47:34] Speaker 1: This attorney's office and she was sending pictures of me bruises on her face, any black eye. We saw one scratch on a scratch on her finger. Nothing on his hand. They noticed no red, no bleeding on his hand. Something that might be expected for somebody who punches the glass window multiple times and hard enough for it to crack, as well as punching another person in the basement multiple times. You would anticipate to see some kind of red mark. At least something on her hand. Officers, both officers said nothing. Didn't see anything. Plenty of time to come up with what she wants to say next. Come up with some details to maybe post her story, which frankly, she does when she also interviews with the district attorney's office five months later, when she remembers that she screamed and asked for help and there was cops coming and she heard that. And you'll get those elements of criminal mischief when you go back. And one of the important elements in this case is it is contained in a single criminal episode. [00:48:28] Speaker 5: Seven days prior to now. That's a pretty long criminal episode. Single criminal episode. Remember that. [00:48:38] Speaker 1: Now, also we got from the cops. We got some interesting stuff today. I'll address the elephant in the room. Second, obviously, I did not ID was the person, you know, as a defendant and that officer was the one that's not Mr. Brissinio originally. So, these officers seem to have something going on, but they don't seem to understand what's going on in this situation. The officers often never went to the location again. Miss Martinez claimed there was multiple people around that saw this a busy public parking lot officer didn't go back to talk to anybody. They didn't go back to see if there was any staying on the ground that Miss Martinez claim might have been taken. They didn't even go and collecting radio surveillance footage from any of the multiple stores that were starting that parking lot. They just immediately arrested Mr. Brissinio and charged him with these crimes. The burden sits with the prosecution in this case and in every critical case. And it's a high burden beyond a reasonable doubt. This is the highest burden of criminal justice system. This is higher than it takes to win multimillion dollars in a civil lawsuit. It's even higher than when the state wants to take your children away. It is the highest standard and there's no way to be firmly convinced based on what the prosecution showed me today. [00:50:00] Speaker 5: Again, serious obligations were our serious proof. [00:50:04] Speaker 1: In opening arguments this morning, the defense described the relationship between Miss Martinez, Mr. Percentio, as a failing relationship. Ask yourself, why is the relationship failing? It is because the defendant, Mr. Percentio, is breaking Miss Martinez's property and beating her. Mr. Percentio, on the day that he was arrested, on the day of the assault, had a chance to tell his side of the story. It was a story that Miss Martinez is crazy and autistic and defense wants you to believe that Miss Martinez cannot believe because her story continued to change. But you know what doesn't change? The crack on the car, the breaking phone, and the broken glasses. Miss Martinez is a staple. Those are supported by pictures that we presented and that you have when you're delivering. You can see the bruise to her face and you can see the broken car window. And is it possible for Miss Martinez to reach across the car while she is being assaulted to break the car window? And does it make sense for Miss Martinez to break her own car, to break her own phone, to break her own car window? Members of the jury, this was also one kernel episode. The defense wants you to believe that the gap in time makes it not one kernel episode. But for Mr. President, breaking Miss Martinez's phone, we would not be here today. The assault and the assault would not have occurred. The only verdict here that the evidence supports is a verdict of guilty. Thank you. [00:51:38] Speaker 4: All right, Crystal, here is, I have a brief photos and one body, one camera exhibit and the instructions. Just follow Crystal, you're going to be going out that door right there. Just take everything with you that you're going to need in the jury room, okay? By recalling 25 M3626, people state of Colorado versus Isaac Brasino. It's my understanding that we have a verdict for anything the court needs to address with before we bring in the jury? From the people, your honor. Nothing from the defense, your honor. And let's reflect that both attorneys are present for both sides and defendant is also present. [00:52:18] Speaker 5: All rise, jury entrance. All right, for the final time, Mr. Cooner. [00:52:30] Speaker 4: Yes, close enough. Please be seated. Sir, without stating the verdict, did you reach a verdict and answer the questions on both counts? Yes. Okay, Chris, look at that paperwork, please. [00:52:52] Speaker 5: All right. [00:52:53] Speaker 4: Jury, very count number one, charge of assault on the third degree. We, the jury, find the defendant, Isaac Brasino, not guilty of count number one, assault on the third degree, signed by the four person. Jury verdict count number two, charge of criminal mischief. We, the jury, find the defendant, Isaac Brasino, not guilty of count number two, signed by the four person. Does either side wish to have the jurors polled? Not completely right here. Neither from the defense, your honor. Okay. Let me give you, I'm going to speak to you just briefly, since you got done at 2:46 p.m. You have now completed your duties as jurors in this case on our discharge with the thanks to the court. Chris, if you could take that back into the jury room, please. I think your name victim is on Webex right now. Do you know what her position is with regards to sealing? Did you talk to her about that? Yeah, your honor. Okay. Why don't we do this? I'll go ahead and dismiss the other charges. I'll give you 14 days to speak to her about the sealing, okay? Well, let's do it tomorrow. Okay. All right. Ms. Angelique, the DA is going to talk to you about sealing the matter. [00:54:11] Speaker ?: Thank you.