WOODLAND, CA – On Monday, Judge Samuel T. McAdam resumed presiding over the murder trial of Carlos Dominguez in Yolo County Superior Court. Deputy Public Defender Dan Hutchinson called Juan Carlos Reales-Campos, Carlos Reales Dominguez’s father, to testify about his son’s childhood and deteriorating mental state.
Dominguez remains in custody and faces two counts of murder, three enhancements for use of a deadly weapon, infliction of great bodily injury, a special circumstance allegation for multiple murders, and a prior felony conviction.
Last Friday, The Vanguard reported that the trial appeared to be moving ahead of schedule. Concerns were raised regarding inconsistencies in reports, officers turning off body cameras, and whether Dominguez had been properly informed of his Miranda rights.
DPD Hutchinson called Reales-Campos to the stand with the assistance of a Spanish interpreter. Hutchinson began with questions about Reales-Campos’s family background. Reales-Campos, who married Karla—a woman from an upper socioeconomic background—lived with her in El Salvador. Carlos Reales Dominguez is their eldest of three children. Reales-Campos last saw Dominguez in person in December 2022.
Reales-Campos immigrated to the United States in June 2004, with his wife joining him in subsequent years. Young Carlos remained in El Salvador under the care of his grandparents. The family had limited contact—mainly phone calls and occasional photos—until 2009, when Dominguez, then six years old, was brought to the U.S. by a woman described as a family friend, with the help of “coyotes.”
Hutchinson asked, “Did you think that taking your son from the only home he’s ever known by a person you never knew and coyotes was a good idea?” Reales-Campos answered, “No.”
When Hutchinson inquired about concerns regarding the journey, Reales-Campos explained that Dominguez’s grandmother—his primary caregiver—had fallen ill and faced unconfirmed threats, which prompted them to send Dominguez to the U.S. He acknowledged that both he and his wife were worried Dominguez “could get lost, kidnapped, die.”
Hutchinson asked whether they had considered the trauma the journey might inflict on Dominguez. Reales-Campos said “yes,” and added that both his wife and Dominguez’s grandmother had similar concerns. Upon arriving in the U.S., Dominguez was taken into custody at an Immigration Detention Center in Texas. After three to four months, a man described by Reales-Campos as his wife’s uncle picked Dominguez up.
During this time, Reales-Campos had no direct contact with his son and was unsure whether his wife had spoken with him. Dominguez was finally reunited with his parents in June or July 2009—his first time seeing Reales-Campos since 2004.
When asked if he had considered getting Dominguez professional help following the traumatic journey, Reales-Campos said “no.” He observed that Dominguez had trouble adjusting, noting he was “not very loving, wouldn’t trust us very much.” Asked whether Dominguez remembered him, Reales-Campos said, “I don’t think so.”
To help build trust, Dominguez’s grandmother came to stay with the family for five months on a visa. Unlike Dominguez, she flew into San Francisco. Reales-Campos described the bond between Dominguez and his grandmother as very close, saying Dominguez was “very loving” with her and was visibly upset when she left, crying and feeling sad.
Hutchinson then questioned Reales-Campos about Dominguez’s early education and learning English. Reales-Campos said Dominguez became fluent in about a year and a half, much faster than he had himself. Dominguez performed well academically in elementary school and did not get into trouble.
In 2011, about six months after the birth of their third child, Karla returned to work at a fast-food restaurant. Reales-Campos was working approximately 50 hours a week. Asked if Dominguez was close to his siblings, Reales-Campos responded “yes,” explaining that Dominguez was attentive to their needs and often played with them.
When both parents were at work, a babysitter watched the youngest child while Dominguez was responsible for his other siblings—getting them to and from school safely. As both younger children grew older, Dominguez took on responsibility for both of them until a parent returned home.
In high school, Dominguez continued to earn good grades, played several sports, and enrolled in honors courses. Reales-Campos described the family’s reaction to Dominguez’s acceptance to UC Davis as “happy.” At that time, Reales-Campos said Dominguez had no serious medical or mental health issues, and his overall health was “fine.”
Dominguez began his first year at UC Davis in Fall 2020, after the family relocated to Tracy, CA. He stayed in close contact, returned home for breaks, and regularly called family members.
During summer break, the family vacationed in Las Vegas. Hutchinson presented a photo from the trip, which Reales-Campos identified as Dominguez smiling with his arm around a girl he said was his girlfriend—though he couldn’t recall her name, he noted “Kaylee sounded familiar.”
In Fall 2021, Dominguez returned to UC Davis. According to Reales-Campos, there were no changes in Dominguez’s appearance, hygiene, or behavior at that time. However, in his second year (2021–2022), Dominguez became distant. “He was very quiet,” said Reales-Campos, noting that this was out of character.
Hutchinson referenced statements Reales-Campos had given in September 2024. Reales-Campos reiterated that Dominguez experienced significant changes—losing weight, ceasing to exercise or be active, and staring blankly at walls. His hygiene declined; although he still showered, it was no longer daily as it had been in high school. His hair grew long and unkempt.
Asked what he thought caused these changes, Reales-Campos said he suspected “a lot of stress at school or drug use,” but did not consider mental illness at the time and did not discuss it with his wife.
By December 2022, during winter break, Reales-Campos observed continued changes in Dominguez and began to consider a mental health issue. “I tried to talk to him about what he was feeling or if he was taking something,” he said, but did not pursue any treatment options such as speaking with a psychologist.
Reales-Campos wanted Dominguez to stay home from UC Davis at that point “because we saw him not in a good state,” but admitted he never expressed this directly to Dominguez.
By January 2023, Dominguez had stopped communicating with the family. Hutchinson asked whether Reales-Campos had concerns about mental illness in March 2023. He replied “yes.” Despite those concerns, Reales-Campos still drove Dominguez back to UC Davis.
The family did not hear from Dominguez again until May 3, 2023, when they learned he had been arrested.
Hutchinson asked whether Reales-Campos had done anything after not hearing from his son. He said he sent text messages, but received no reply.
Hutchinson then questioned why he didn’t drive to Davis to check on Dominguez, suggesting it might have been due to concern over missing work. Reales-Campos denied that was the reason. Asked if he was concerned about missing work to testify that day, he responded “yes.”
In closing, Hutchinson asked whether, after noticing changes in Dominguez, either parent had done anything beyond talking to him to get help. Reales-Campos answered “yes,” but when asked to specify, admitted, “nothing.”
Cross-examination of Dominguez’s father is scheduled to begin today at 1:30 p.m.
What is the trial about?
Is it about trying to prove that Carlos Dominguez committed the crimes, which in my opinion is a forgone conclusion, or is it about his mental state?
The first phase is the guilt phase where they have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it – I agree, it’s a foregone conclusion. The second phase, after he is found guilty, will determine his sanity.
I share in KO’s confusion on this, as I read that all parties agreed that the defendant had committed the crimes. What is the process or legal reason for spending the money on a guilt phase ? Clearly the issue is his mental state.
The easy answer is that’s how the law works. You basically have to establish guilt before you can go to the sanity phase of the trial. I would suggest it’s not nearly as much of a waste of time and energy as you think because all the evidence that needs to be put on for the second phase is getting put on in the first phase anyway. In other words, you have to understand the underlying crime in order to understand whether or not he was sane when he did it. For example, you can see with the family testimony from yesterday that they’re already laying the groundwork about his deteriorating mental state.
Ok, that makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.