LOS ANGELES, Calif. — During a heated progress report hearing in a Los Angeles County courthouse Friday, allegations raised by a complaining witness were overlooked by several court officials, according to statements made in court.
While the accused was not ordered to physically appear in court, both defense and prosecuting attorneys were present. The hearing was intended to serve as a progress report on the accused’s mental health diversion program.
Per records submitted by the defense, Judge Liliana Gonzalez noted that the accused had been making significant progress through weekly drug testing, therapy and anger management courses.
Deputy City Attorney Todd Tristan then informed the court that the accused had been issued a Criminal Protective Order and that the complaining witness was in attendance. Following that announcement, the complaining witness addressed the court.
She stated that several police reports had been filed containing video footage that she said would prove the accused violated the conditions of the imposed Criminal Protective Order. “The moment you watch one clip of this evidence, I am certain that you will want to help me modify the restraining order and grant me and my son’s safety from our abuser,” she cried.
Following her statement, Judge Gonzalez said there had been too many statements exchanged between the accused and the complaining witness. The judge declined to review additional evidence at that time and instead offered to schedule a hearing for a later date.
DCA Tristan further cited the history of the restraining order, noting that the shared child between the two parties was recently added following an incident. Despite that information, he contended there was no basis for a Criminal Protective Order violation in the case. The public defender agreed.
The complaining witness then showed visible confusion and raised her hand to address the court, but she was ignored.
Judge Gonzalez offered two minutes to the complaining witness and prosecutor, after which she said she would disregard the concern if no resolution was reached. DCA Tristan then escorted the complainant to the witness room, where an argument ensued.
Judge Gonzalez indicated the case would remain on calendar until the original diversion end date of July 6, 2026.
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.
