VAN NUYS, Calif. — Defense counsel argued Friday that investigators failed to conduct a complete DNA analysis in a gross vehicular manslaughter case tied to a fatal hit-and-run near Las Flores Canyon Road and Pacific Coast Highway, raising questions about who was driving at the time of the collision.
During closing statements at Van Nuys Courthouse West, the defense focused on what it described as gaps in the investigation of DNA samples in a case involving two charges, one of gross vehicular manslaughter and one of gross negligence.
The criminal case involves the accused and her dating partner, who were involved in the hit and death of a pedestrian near Las Flores Canyon Road and Pacific Coast Highway.
The accused pleaded not guilty to the charges, stating she was not driving at the time of the collision with the pedestrian.
She stated that she drove to her dating partner’s house, and from there her dating partner drove the car, as he usually does.
She also stated that while she was looking at her phone to change a song, she heard a loud noise and kept telling her partner to stop.
Additionally, the accused said that her partner was panicking and asking to switch with her from the driver’s seat to the front passenger seat.
To this, the accused agreed and switched seats with her partner and took over driving the vehicle.
The prosecution stated that various witnesses saw a vehicle matching the description of the accused’s car traveling at a “dangerous speed” and ultimately striking the pedestrian victim.
It is emphasized that the accused violated multiple infractions, such as running a red light and violating the basic speed law, which endangered pedestrians and other drivers.
Further, witnesses stated that the vehicle did not stop after the collision with the pedestrian and in fact continued driving at an even faster speed.
In addition, the prosecution showed footage from a Whole Foods parking lot in which the vehicle enters the lot and, after some time, is turned off.
Then, both the accused and her dating partner are seen exiting the vehicle, with the accused coming out from the driver’s side and the dating partner from the front passenger side.
After this, the accused and her dating partner requested an Uber ride from Malibu to Cerritos that cost around $228.
The prosecution also added that the accused’s story became inconsistent over time, especially between the first meeting with authorities and the second meeting.
Specifically, details about the location, the description of how they found the vehicle and the report of the vehicle as stolen became inconsistent.
In response, defense attorney Nicholas Rosenberg highlighted in his closing statement what he described as an incomplete DNA investigation.
He stated that DNA samples were taken from the accused and the pedestrian victim but no DNA samples were taken from the accused’s dating partner.
Further, Rosenberg stated that during the investigation the driver’s side exterior door had three DNA contributors identified, one of whom was confirmed to be the accused and the other two were unknown.
In addition, these two unknown contributors were never sent to the national database to be compared and identified.
Rosenberg also emphasized that the front passenger door interior and exterior were never analyzed, which he argued could have brought forward crucial information to the case about who was driving.
Rosenberg connected this to the accused’s statement that she was not driving the vehicle at the time of the incident, but rather that her dating partner was, and that she switched to the driver’s seat after the incident, which he stated could have been proved through a complete DNA investigation of the driver’s seat.
In response, the prosecution argued that DNA from the accused’s dating partner would not have mattered because they had been dating for three years.
In addition, the prosecution maintained there would still be no explanation for the vehicle being abandoned.
Following the closing statements, the jury began deliberations on whether the accused was guilty of the two charges, but due to jury circumstances deliberations were moved to next week.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
