Morning: Investigators Testify in Dominguez Trial
On Wednesday, Judge Samuel T. McAdam continued presiding over the murder trial of Carlos Dominguez in Yolo County Superior Court. Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson resumed playing footage from Dominguez’s post-arrest interrogation and called two witnesses who worked on the case. Deputy District Attorney Matthew P. De Moura briefly cross-examined both.
Dominguez remains in custody, charged with two counts of murder, one count of attempted murder, multiple weapon and injury enhancements, and a prior felony conviction.
The previous court hearing featured interrogation footage conducted by Davis Police Department Sergeants Matt Muscardini and Stephen Ramos. The defense argued that the detectives used unproven or false statements to elicit incriminating responses and exploited Dominguez’s mental state during the questioning.
Hutchinson resumed playing the video, which picked up at approximately 11:40 p.m. on May 3, 2023—the day of Dominguez’s arrest.
In the footage, Sgt. Muscardini and Sgt. Ramos asked Dominguez, “Are you sorry?” Dominguez responded, “No.” When asked if he understood what remorse meant, he said “yes,” but again answered “no” when asked if he had remorse for the lives he took.
The officers asked whether Dominguez had ever killed or wanted to kill anyone or anything before. He answered “no” to both. When asked if he felt relieved, he again said “no.” Asked whether he believed he should be released, he replied, “Yes.”
When asked if it was wrong to kill two people or harm another, Dominguez responded, “Yeah,” to both questions.
The interrogation paused briefly as two individuals entered the room to collect evidence—cheek swabs, hair samples, photographs, and Dominguez’s clothing and shoes.
After the evidence collection, questioning resumed. Asked again whether he was sorry after having time to reflect, Dominguez replied, “I don’t think so.” When asked if he valued human life, he responded, “Yeah.”
The detectives pressed him further, asking how he could value life but not feel remorse. Dominguez didn’t respond. When asked what he would say to the victims’ families, he answered, “I don’t know,” then added, “I want to talk to them.”
Sgt. Muscardini and Sgt. Ramos explained that he could not speak directly with the families but suggested they could record a message if he wished. It remains unclear whether this occurred.
When asked what he thought would happen next, Dominguez replied, “I’m not sure.” Asked whether he wished the third victim had died, he said “no,” and when asked if he was glad she lived, he answered, “Yeah.” Pressed further, he said, “Because she’s alive,” but denied trying to kill her, stating, “I didn’t.”
Frustrated, the detectives challenged his statement, noting, “When you stab someone forty times, the likelihood of them living isn’t high.” The video concluded around 1 a.m., with Dominguez—now wearing a white suit and handcuffed—mumbling something inaudible when asked if he had anything more to say.
After the video, Hutchinson called Sonya Rocha, an investigator with the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office. Rocha, who first joined the office in 1996 and returned in 2021, confirmed that two investigators were assigned to the Dominguez case—an unusually high number due to the case’s profile and workload.
Hutchinson presented several photos of Dominguez taken at different stages of the trial. Some showed Dominguez wearing green clothing, which Rocha identified as a “suicide smock.”
A photo from a July 24, 2023, court appearance, taken after Dominguez received emergency psychiatric medication, was also shown. Rocha described his appearance as extremely still: “He sat still, wouldn’t move—like a statue.”
A subsequent photo taken after Dominguez’s stay at Atascadero State Hospital showed a change in appearance. “His hair was cut, and there wasn’t as much of a flat affect,” Rocha noted. Flat affect—a symptom of schizophrenia—refers to a lack of expressive facial expressions, body language, and emotional responsiveness.
Rocha recalled accompanying Hutchinson on a jail visit, which is atypical for investigators. She explained that she attended to see if Dominguez would respond more to a female speaking Spanish. Despite this effort, Rocha said his responses remained minimal. When asked in Spanish, Dominguez replied only that he wanted Hutchinson to explain.
Rocha also testified about Dominguez’s physical health. While he previously weighed 108 pounds, he weighed in at 172.2 pounds this week—suggesting significant improvement since receiving treatment.
During cross-examination, DDA De Moura asked Rocha if she had attended all of Dominguez’s court appearances, either in person or online. She confirmed that she had.
De Moura then asked whether Dominguez had walked into court each time and was never wheeled in or assisted. Rocha confirmed, “Correct.”
He also asked if Rocha was familiar with Department 1, where early proceedings took place, including the glass partition between Dominguez and Hutchinson. Rocha said she was.
Finally, De Moura asked whether she knew who cut Dominguez’s hair or whether it was his decision or jail-mandated. Rocha replied she did not know.
Hutchinson then called the final witness of the morning: Andrew Bornhoeft, an investigator with the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office and former crime and intelligence analyst.
Hutchinson asked whether Bornhoeft had been tasked with locating Dominguez’s YouTube channel. Bornhoeft said yes. Though he could not recall the exact date of the video, he confirmed it appeared to be from Dominguez’s high school years.
A short video from the channel, roughly three minutes long, was played. It showed a teenage Dominguez enthusiastically walking through a crowded high school hallway, naming friends and discussing plans for the channel, including posting video game content.
During cross-examination, De Moura asked whether there were many videos on the channel. Bornhoeft confirmed there were, and that not all were similar in tone to the one played.
De Moura concluded by asking whether Bornhoeft knew the meaning of the name “savage family,” which appeared in the video. Bornhoeft responded, “No, I do not.”
Bornhoeft was marked as subject to recall. The trial is scheduled to resume this afternoon at 1:30 p.m.
Afternoon: Forensic Psychiatrist Confirms Schizophrenia Diagnosis in Dominguez Trial
Testimony continued Wednesday afternoon in the trial of Carlos Reales Dominguez, as Deputy Public Defender Daniel Hutchinson called Chief Investigator Shanna Bly and forensic psychiatrist Dr. Stephen Weiner, who was accepted by the court as an expert witness. Dr. Weiner concluded that Dominguez suffers from schizophrenia.
Dominguez is charged with two counts of murder and one count of attempted murder, with enhancements for the use of a deadly weapon, multiple murder charges, and a prior felony conviction.
After the midday recess, Hutchinson called Bly to the witness stand. Bly, the Chief Investigator for the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office, has been directly involved in Dominguez’s case. Hutchinson questioned her about visits she made to Dominguez at the Yolo County Jail in June 2023, during which she accompanied Investigator Sonya Rocha and Hutchinson.
Hutchinson first asked Bly to describe Dominguez’s behavior during their initial encounter.
“He walked very stiff […] He was stiff in his chair, his hair was hanging in front of his face, he was malodorous,” Bly testified.
When asked about his communication, Bly described Dominguez as “verbal, but not conversational,” noting his responses were “minimal.”
She also testified that, during that first visit, Dominguez asked for a laptop because he believed he was falling behind in his classes. Although she informed him that he was no longer a student at UC Davis, he asked for a phone number to contact the university.
Hutchinson then questioned Bly about a May 2024 visit to Davis’ Sycamore Park, where she and Hutchinson searched for a face-like image allegedly carved into a tree. Bly testified that they were “looking for a face-like picture carved or picked into a tree.”
Photos of the carving were presented in court. Bly identified sections that resembled a face and described that part of the tree as unique, suggesting it could have been made by a person.
She also identified parts of Sycamore Park and a nearby bike overpass to Crystal Grove, believed to be the route Dominguez allegedly took after the killing of Karim Abou-Najm. Bly returned to the area in May 2024 to take measurements.
During cross-examination by Deputy District Attorney Matt De Moura, Bly testified that while Dominguez’s answers in June 2023 were appropriate “some of the time,” they were not always coherent.
De Moura suggested that the tree carving could have been caused by animals or weather. Bly acknowledged both were possibilities.
Next, Hutchinson called Dr. Stephen Weiner, a forensic psychiatry fellow at UC Davis who had recently completed his psychiatry residency. Dr. Weiner was assigned to Dominguez’s case.
After explaining his clinical experience—including work at the California Medical Facility with individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia—Judge Samuel T. McAdam recognized him as an expert witness.
Dr. Weiner testified that he reviewed Dominguez’s records from Yolo County Jail, Atascadero State Hospital, and his treating doctor. He also reviewed testimony from family, roommates, friends, bystanders, and officers, along with seven hours of interrogation footage from May 2023 and older media from Dominguez’s high school years.
He said he met with Dominguez four times between November 2024 and May 2025 and completed an independent psychiatric evaluation.
Weiner described the diagnostic tools he used, including tests for neurocognitive disorders and malingering—the act of feigning or exaggerating mental illness. Dominguez tested in the normal range for cognitive function and was identified as a “genuine responder” on malingering assessments.
Although Weiner did not observe positive symptoms like hallucinations or delusions—likely mitigated by over a year of antipsychotic treatment—he noted negative symptoms such as rigidity and emotional blunting.
Asked directly by Hutchinson whether Dominguez suffered from schizophrenia in April and May 2023, Weiner responded, “That is my opinion.”
He described schizophrenia as a disorder involving difficulty distinguishing reality from fantasy, including symptoms like hallucinations, delusions, disorganized speech, and disengagement from surroundings.
“People [with schizophrenia] stop engaging with their surroundings—things they enjoy,” Weiner testified.
He also noted that those with schizophrenia often struggle with abstract thinking, possibly explaining Dominguez’s academic decline prior to the stabbings.
One major symptom Weiner observed was avolition—a loss of interest in activities, relationships, and academics. “One of the central symptoms Mr. Dominguez displayed was […] a gradual loss of functioning in school, [socially,] […] activities he’s typically interested in,” he said.
Asked about the causes of schizophrenia, Weiner said they are not fully understood but likely include genetic factors and adverse childhood experiences.
Hutchinson then asked Weiner to assume a series of biographical details: that Dominguez’s parents emigrated from El Salvador when he was an infant; that he was smuggled into the U.S. by ‘coyotes’; that he was detained in an immigration facility at age six; and that he did not recognize his parents upon reunification. Weiner confirmed these could be considered adverse experiences.
Weiner also affirmed that childhood sexual abuse at age five could constitute such an experience.
He explained the concept of a “first break” in schizophrenia—a person’s first psychotic episode, which may involve florid psychosis, including bizarre and potentially dangerous behavior.
Florid psychosis also impairs memory, including autobiographical recall. “[It] makes [autobiographical memory and memory retrieval] worse,” he testified.
Hutchinson asked Weiner to interpret Dominguez’s arrest-day interrogation footage. Weiner described Dominguez as displaying “a severe, severe blunting of affect” and an unusual lack of basic needs. “He didn’t ask for a bathroom break; ask for food. There was no desire to do any of that, even when prompted.”
Dominguez also misspelled his mother’s and high school’s names, gave a false name and incorrect address—all of which Weiner attributed to disorganized thought and speech.
“[People with schizophrenia] can have trouble thinking clearly; appreciating their situation,” Weiner said.
He concluded that Dominguez was likely experiencing florid psychosis at the time of the stabbings, marked by paranoia, hallucinations, and delusions—and that he may not fully remember what occurred.
During cross-examination, Deputy District Attorney Spencer Van Der Hoek questioned Weiner about abstract topics such as the science of memory, consciousness, and the validity of forensic psychiatry. Van Der Hoek suggested the field was controversial, but Weiner asserted it is no more controversial than other evidence-based disciplines.
The court adjourned during Van Der Hoek’s cross-examination of Weiner. Judge McAdam announced the trial would resume with continued testimony Thursday at 9:30 a.m.
