By Nicholas Winarto
On Monday the resumption of the Hernandez, Givens, and Bradford trial started off on a sad note. Joseph Hernandez, Joshua Givens, and Rakhem Bradford are charged with multiple burglaries in Davis. One of the jurors, well-liked by the defense and prosecution, received a doctor’s note excusing him from duty. Judge Reed considered delaying the trial to wait for the juror, but the juror was unsure of his return date and was subsequently excused. Both alternates were then sworn into the jury, as another juror was dismissed last week.
Before the jury was brought in, Ms. Serafin submitted text messages retrieved from Cellebrite as evidence, some of which was rejected due to the lack of probative value. Cellebrite is a software that extracts information from cellphones, such as pictures, videos, messages, contacts, call logs, and web searches.
Investigator Kevin Skaife, from the UCD Police Department, was called back to the stand on Monday to further testify in the long-running burglary trial. Deputy District Attorney Michelle Serafin began by questioning Investigator Skaife about the text messages, that were extracted using Cellebrite, from a key witness who had a special relationship to Joseph Hernandez. Ms. Serafin was using the text messages to establish communication between the witness and other parties.
Ms. Serafin produced the photographs of the texts and web searches. One of the web searches extracted from the key witness’ phone on October 16, 2013, pertained to information about a 32” Sony flat screen TV and was sent around 4 a.m. On the same day, a burglary crime was reported regarding a stolen 32” Sony TV from Cuarto, an off-campus residential area.
Investigator Skaife was then asked to read the text messages from the published evidence. Skaife read a message sent by the key witness regarding the engagement between her and Joseph Hernandez, and when the recipient of the message asked why, the response was, “He loves the s*** out of me.” There were also messages talking about driving Joseph Hernandez to Richmond.
They key witness in the case received a call from a friend saying that her name was given to the police. After the phone call, we can see the search history on the phone dated October 22, 2013, filled with queries on how to delete a Facebook account. The following day, October 23, 2013, a text message sent by the key witness was read by Investigator Skaife, saying that Joseph is a criminal and that she wants to live a life of crime.
From the Cellebite extraction of the key witness’ phone, 1,858 pictures were recovered and reviewed. Out of the 1,858 pictures there were only six pictures of Joseph Hernandez and there were not 
any pictures of stolen property. One of the pictures of Joseph Hernandez was of him sleeping in the background, with the focus on the key witness’ held out hand, showing off a ring. The caveat of the software is that there is no way to tell if a picture, video, message, or contact information was deleted. According to Investigator Skaife, some deleted items are recovered, but one cannot assume that all deleted items have been recovered. An example was shown where a text message was deleted, but then retrieved by the software. However, because the message was deleted, the information of the sender/receiver was missing so there was no way to tell if it was an incoming message rather than an outgoing one.
Defense Attorney Ava Landers asked Investigator Skaife if he verified whether contents of the phone were deleted or not, to which he said no. Ms. Landers asked about the difference between the advanced logical search done through the Cellebrite software versus the physical search. Investigaor Skaife stated that the physical search allows one to find deleted information, whereas the advanced logical search simply extracts readily available data.
Moving forward, Ms. Serafin began questioning Investigator Skaife about his encounters with the key witness. During the first encounter with the key witness on November 6, 2013, Investigator Skaife recalled her as being nervous, evasive and in denial of all accusations. She denied her involvement when Investigator Skaife questioned her about the string of burglaries at Cuarto from October 16, 2013, through October 17, 2013, but soon changed her answer after he showed her the surveillance footage. The key witness said her friend who lived at Cuarto left her wallet in the car, so she could access the dormitories. The key witness was accompanied by a male who, according to her, only stole a laptop charger. She, on the other hand, was adamant about not stealing herself. Investigator Skaife asked her how she was going to pay the victims back, to which she asked why she would have to pay for items she never stole.
On November 7, 2013, Investigator Skaife met with the key witness again and seized her phone to extract information. During the meeting, the key witness talked about Joseph Hernandez and her love for him to Investigator Skaife. She also stated that she was embarrassed to be seen burgling with Joseph Hernandez. Two days later (November 9, 2013), Investigator Skaife received an email from the key witness saying that her parents are angry, and with questions about restitution for the stolen property. The email did not immediately result in an arranged future meeting time.
December 20, 2013, was the third meeting between the key witness and Investigator Skaife. During the meeting, the key witness was seen by Investigator Skaife as being much more cooperative because she thought there was a warrant out for her arrest. At the beginning of the meeting, the key witness told Investigator Skaife that she is no longer willing to lie for Joseph Hernandez because he threatened her. Furthermore, the key witness said she called off the marriage to prevent future problems, and said that Joseph Hernandez made her an accomplice without her knowledge. She divulged information about several robberies within Davis, one in particular at Sharps & Flats. Investigator Skaife admitted that he had had no knowledge of that robbery prior to the key witness’ statement.
A fourth meeting was scheduled on December 23, 2013, between the key witness, Investigator Skaife, and Davis Police Department Detective Michael Munoz. During this meeting, Investigator Skaife drove around Davis while the key witness pointed out houses that had been burgled.
After the lunch break, Chief Deputy Public Defender Allison Zuvela questioned Investigator Skaife. Ms. Zuvela asked if Skaife went through the text messages, to which he said yes. She then presented the evidence previously used by Ms. Serafin, showing the text messages that were extracted. In Ms. Zuvela’s argument, she showed a text message sent by the key witness to a friend that said she knew people at 1801 Drexel Drive, and she asked Skaife if he asked the key witness about the house, to which he said no. Additionally, a text message mentioned the male that accompanied the key witness during the Cuarto burglaries, but, when asked by Public Defender Allison Zuvela, Skaife said he did not do a follow-up.
No further questions were asked and a new witness, Matthew O’Connor, was brought to the stand.
Matthew O’Connor is the Director of Student Conduct at Sacramento State, but previously worked at the University of California, Davis, as a Student Conduct Administrator. In that position, Mr. O’Connor was responsible for investigating and adjudicating. He worked closely with students who had been accused of dishonesty or policy violation.
In October of 2013, Mr. O’Connor was made aware of several burglaries that occurred at Cuarto. Students living in dormitories report incidents to the Resident Assistant, who then files an online report which the Student Conduct Administrator can then read and sort out. Mr. O’Connor said he attempted to identify the burglar by interviewing victims as well as investigating card swipe activities and building surveillance.
To narrow down the list of potential suspects, Mr. O’Connor ran a general report for every card swipe in October 2013. Reports state whether a card was successfully swiped or if it failed. He stated that the same ID card can be used to access all three buildings (Emerson, Thoreau, and Webster Hall), with every door in each building having a unique ID. Furthermore, Mr. O’Connor mentioned that the residence halls are generally secured by card access readers 24 hours a day, but there are random exceptions where the doors to Thoreau Hall may be unsecured for a period of time in the afternoon.
After generating a general report for every card swipe in October 2013, Mr. O’Connor looked at card swipe activity for all three UC Davis dinning commons (Tercero, Segundo, and Cuarto). Then, he looked at activity specifically in the Cuarto dormitories. Ms. Serafin presented evidence to the court showing the report of a student’s card swipe activities. Mr. O’Connor said that this particular student piqued his interest because he noticed multiple guest swipes for the dinning commons and found it unusual as there is a rule mandating that no guest can stay longer than seven days.
Next, two separate surveillance footages from the front entrance of the Cuarto Dining Commons were produced, each showing the student of interest and the key witness. The first video played showed the student and key witness accompanied by an unidentified male, but the second video showed them with Joseph Hernandez at the dining commons. Afterwards, Ms. Serafin played several videos from surveillance cameras within and outside the three halls of Cuarto, which showed the key witness and a male walking around the dormitories. Mr. O’Connor stated that there are no cameras in the hallways of the dormitories due to privacy reasons because they cannot have a camera facing bedroom doors. Furthermore, he stated that there are many blind spots that are not covered by surveillance cameras.
Later in October 2013, Mr. O’Connor submitted the surveillance footage to the UC Davis Police Department.
