By Abigail Soler and Monica Velez
On the morning of March 1, 2016, defendant Jessie Reneaux of Winters, CA, went to trial after pleading not guilty to charges of domestic violence against a cohabitant, vandalism and dissuading a witness.
The morning began with opening statements from Deputy District Attorney Crystal Chua and Defense Attorney Jeffery Raven. Both the prosecution and the defense gave short opening statements, and moved in a quick yet efficient manner through the four witnesses called during Department 14’s morning session.
DDA Chua’s opening statement described to the jury the type of information and evidence that was going to be shown to them. She outlined for the jury the series of events that allegedly took place in the early hours of August 28, 2015. Chua described that the alleged victim and her partner, Mr. Reneaux, lived in a granny flat, above a detached garage, on the landlord’s lot.
Chua instructed the jury that Mr. Reneaux had smashed the windshield of the alleged victim’s car, and messed with her ignition, resulting in the inability to start the car. This occurred on August 13, 2015, when police were called to the residence. DDA Chua continued, telling the jury that the landlord claims to have heard loud noises and shouting on August 28, 2015. The noises the landlord heard prompted his daughter to call the Winters Police Department, reporting a disturbance.
When the officer arrived at the residence, there was unsuccessful contact and no one came to the door. The next morning, the landlord tried to get in contact with either tenant for maintenance, having unsuccessful contact via phone calls and knocking on the front door. Shortly after, the alleged victim was seen with bruises on her arms, prompting the landlord to call the police again to the residence.
When the officer arrived on August 28, the alleged victim gave a statement to Officer Morgan Hatcher, who took photos of her bruised arms prior to leaving the residence.
Chua explained that the jury would hear phone calls from Mr. Reneaux to the alleged victim, while he was in jail, telling her to call the police and the DA’s office and tell them that her previous statements were wrong.
Defense Attorney Raven gave his opening statement, which reiterated to the jurors to be genuinely critical of the statements that they hear. Raven informed the jury that the alleged victim is refusing to testify and also pointed out that she never called the police in this matter. The landlord, who had been threatening to evict the two of them, called the police.
Raven also informed the jury that the tenants never answered the door when the police were called on August 28. He even mentioned that the alleged victim’s statement to the police included admissions that she had smacked the defendant a few times, and was worried she was going to be arrested.
Raven ended his opening statement by reminding the jurors to be critical and to evaluate the credibility of the witnesses.
The People first called the alleged victim to the stand. After just two questions, she stated that, at the advice of her counsel, she was refusing to answer questions. The witness’ reason for refusal was invoking the right of the Fifth Amendment against self-incrimination.
DDA Chua then offered the alleged victim immunity for her witness testimony. She still refused. The judge made a ruling, finding that the privilege of the Fifth Amendment was invalid in this case and ordered her to testify.
The alleged victim was persistent in her refusal. Thus, she was excused from the stand and ordered to return on Friday, March 4, at 11 a.m. for a contempt hearing. The judge instructed the jurors that the witness did not have the right to refuse to testify, and they may consider that during deliberations.
Next, the prosecution called the landlord as the second witness. Questions asked by the prosecution served to validate the series of events that Chua had described during her opening statement.
Chua had the witness describe for the jury the layout of the property with the two residences. The landlord confirmed that both the defendant and the alleged victim were on the rental agreement contract.
Chua asked the witness questions to elicit the sequence of the events beginning in the early hours of August 28, 2015. The witness described loud noises, identifying a male’s voice, coming from the granny flat, which was the reason for his daughter’s call to the police. Because of this call, and the unsuccessful attempt at contacting the alleged victim on August 28, the landlord was concerned for the alleged victim’s safety.
Eventually seeing the alleged victim and noticing her demeanor and bruises, the landlord called 9-1-1 that morning to report a possible domestic abuse, and he identified the name of the defendant to the police.
Mr. Raven asked the witness clarifying questions about August 28, and his eviction process with the tenants. The landlord had initiated an eviction on August 1, 2015, because of a failure to pay rent.
The landlord was unable to recall seeing the police respond to the call in the early hours of the 28th. He was able to remember seeing Mr. Reneaux leave before calling the police around 9:30 a.m. that morning, which was after trying to make contact, by phone and by knocking at the door, with the tenants that morning.
The landlord could not affirmatively answer the following: remembering the alleged victim admitting to assaulting the defendant, the alleged victim being nervous that she would be arrested, or seeing the bruises happen to the alleged victim.
The next witness called was Officer Jose Hermosillo, who was the officer dispatched to the residence at approximately 3:05 a.m. on August 28, 2015.
The questions Chua asked Officer Hermosillo revealed that he was unsuccessful in contacting the tenants of the apartment. Hermosillo told the court that he knocked on the door, loudly, four to five times. He also announced himself as Winters Police two to three times.
Officer Hermosillo testified to hearing nothing but a radio coming from inside of the apartment, causing him to leave after two to three minutes. He notified the dispatcher of the unsuccessful attempt, and then he tried unsuccessfully to get ahold of the reporting party.
Raven opened by confirming with Officer Hermosillo that he did not write a report for this call. He also confirmed with the officer that the potential disturbance was relayed to him through a dispatcher.
Raven then reiterated that the officer radioed back to the dispatcher that there was no contact and that he requested to get the reporting party back on the line, which they could not.
The next witness was Sergeant Albert Ramos, an officer who responded to a September 2, 2015, domestic violence call at the residence.
Chua had the sergeant reveal that he was able to make contact with the alleged victim on September 2. Their discussion revealed that the defendant had come over to the residence to “make peace with her before turning himself in,” and they had argued a little bit before he left.
Chua’s questions to Ramos also revealed that the alleged victim had requested and received a copy of the August 28 police report on September 22, 2015.
Defense’s questions exposed that, again, the alleged victim had not called the police for that disturbance, and it was one of her relatives who had called in. The questions also implied that the September 2 argument was only verbal.
Officer Morgan Hatcher was the last officer called to testify. Hatcher was dispatched to the residence of the defendant and alleged victim at 10:18 a.m. on August 28, 2015.
Hatcher made contact with the alleged victim at the dispatched location of the main house, where the landlord lived. The landlord was present at the time of the alleged victim’s conversation and statement to Officer Hatcher.
Hatcher testified that the alleged victim’s demeanor was hesitant, scared and uncomfortable. When they sat down, Hatcher had noticed bruises on the alleged victim’s arms. The officer took photos of the bruises prior to leaving the residence.
At this point, Chua presented the photos to the witness, which she confirmed were the ones taken on August 28, 2015. Chua showed the images to the jury just before afternoon recess.
Afternoon Session
by Monica Velez
Officer Hatcher resumed her testimony on March 1, 2016, after the lunch recess, regarding the pictures she took of the alleged victim on August 28, 2015. Five different photographs were shown to Officer Hatcher and the jury.
The first photograph showed two bruises on the alleged victim’s forearm, the second showed bruises on her right arm and the third showed more bruises on her left bicep. The fourth photograph showed bruises a little above her wrists and, lastly, the fifth photo showed a purple bruise on the left side of the alleged victim’s jaw line.
Officer Hatcher confirmed to Deputy District Attorney Crystal Chua that she, Hatcher, took the photographs of the alleged victim’s bruises on August 28, 2015. Hatcher spoke with the alleged victim as well, who gave the officer a timeline of what happened when she (the alleged victim) got home around 3:00 a.m. that day.
The alleged victim told the officer that when she got home, defendant Jessie Reneaux was in the bedroom and started yelling at her saying, “F-ing b-ch, I f-ing hate you!” Reneaux then grabbed the alleged victim and pushed her around.
Officer Hatcher recorded part of the alleged victim’s statement, Chua playing the recording for the court. Officer Hatcher confirmed that it was the alleged victim’s voice on the audio recording.
In the recording, the alleged victim said that Reneaux never hit her, only grabbed her, put his hand over her mouth, pulling her jaw downward and telling her to “shut-up.”
The alleged victim said the neighbors called the police while she was lying on the bed crying. She said that the defendant is very aggressive and has punched holes in the walls and has thrown things out the window, like her television.
The alleged victim told Hatcher that she has slapped Reneaux before to get him off of her, and was scared to tell the police because she did not want to get arrested. Officer Hatcher assured her in the recording that would never be the case as long as she was trying to defend herself.
The recording ended with the alleged victim saying she has felt trapped and contained by Reneaux in her apartment, because he screwed the door shut with a piece of wood and screws. She said she feared for her safety because Reneaux is “scary,” “aggressive” and “knows people.”
A picture of the door with the piece of wood and screws was shown to Officer Hatcher and the jury, and Hatcher said the door looked like it had been kicked or pushed several times.
Officer Hatcher had asked the alleged victim if she wanted an emergency protective order against Reneaux, to which she agreed. The emergency protective order only lasts five to seven business days, with the purpose of giving the alleged victim time to get a restraining order.
When Defense Attorney Jeffrey Raven cross-examined Officer Hatcher, he confirmed the fact that the alleged victim said Reneaux never hit her, only grabbed her. Raven added in that what the alleged victim said did not necessarily happen, it was only what she said had happened, and Officer Hatcher agreed with the statement.
Raven asked Officer Hatcher about when the alleged victim had called her and said she wanted to change what she had originally told the officer on August 28, 2015. Officer Hatcher estimated it was about two weeks after the arrest was made, on September 9, 2015.
The last witness of the day was Officer David Gonzalez, who is employed with the Winters Police Department. On August 13, 2015, he was dispatched to the apartment the alleged victim and the defendant shared, regarding vandalism.
Officer Gonzalez said the alleged victim was with two of her friends when he arrived. He said she was crying and emotional, taking awhile to gain her composure and tell him what had happened.
The alleged victim told Officer Gonzalez that she and her boyfriend of over six months, Reneaux, had had an argument that morning when she was getting ready for work. Reneuax started getting angry, throwing things around and punching the wall.
When she tried to walk out to her car, the defendant followed her and continued to yell. He then hit her windshield, making it crack, and hit the roof of the vehicle, making a dent. The alleged victim told the witness that she was afraid at this point and got out of the car.
Reneaux then continued to do something to the ignition with an unknown tool, making it so the alleged victim could not get the car to start. The alleged victim said she was scared for her life and that’s when she called her friends to help her. Reneaux had left the scene at this point.
During cross-examination, Raven asked Officer Gonzalez if he had any knowledge that the alleged victim did drugs, and he said no. When asked, he also confirmed that the alleged victim was the only witness to the incident and nobody else was there.
The testimony ended with Officer Gonzalez confirming the voices in another audio recording to be those of the defendant and the alleged victim. The audio recording will be played for the court during the next day of trial.
