Site hosted by Angelfire.com: Build your free website today!

January 24, 2007

 

This morning the defense resumed their case with the testimony of Albert Cowings, Moloi’s maternal grandfather.  Mr. Cowings testified that his grandson had come to Anaheim to attend his great-grandmother’s birthday, on the 21st of October.  He also testified that his grandson was staying at his other grandparents’ house (in Anaheim), and that Moloi had shown up at the Cowings’ residence on the morning of the 23rd.  He also confirmed that he drove his son out to Corona (to meet Moloi sr.) later that day; at the meeting spot (a Denny’s parking lot), Cowings said that Moloi’s father had given his son’s body a thorough visual once over.  Neither in Corona, nor during his earlier encounters with Moloi that week, did Cowings notice any cuts or bruises on his grandson.  Cowings also stated that Moloi had been wearing the same clothes the entire time he saw him (jean shorts, white t-shirt & sneakers); he also stated that he gave his grandson pocket money on a regular basis.  During cross-examination, ADA Howard Gundy was able to raise some doubt about Cowings’ testimony, but I kind of wonder if Howard might have been too aggressive; he wasn’t mean or anything, but Howard was so quick with the objections that it may have come off like he was [verbally] beating up on an old man.

 

The next witness to take the stand was Alosi Moloi – the defendant’s paternal grandfather.  His questioning went along the same lines as Cowings (came for the party, no injuries seen on Moloi, gave pocket money to grandson, etc.).  One bizarre accusation was made during Alosi’s cross-examination, though: Alosi claimed that Sergeant Kazakos was passing himself off as Detective Duran, and that he & two other detectives searched his home on the 23rd – against his will; he also stated that the police lied to him about why they were looking for his grandson.  Alosi later admitted that the detectives had been invited into the home, and “the search” was a look-around to see who might be in the house – besides Alosi himself; personal possessions weren’t rifled through, and when asked to leave, the officers did so.

 

The next and final witness for the defense came as major shock; the defendant himself took the stand.  Normally a defendant does not take the stand, and for very good reason, but I guess the asshole saw what direction his case was going and decided to roll the dice.

 

Moloi of course denied everything.  He had not come out to Anaheim until the week of his great-grandmother’s birthday.  He did go to the Dupre to visit his friends that worked there, but only three times and never on the overnight shift; Moloi had never seen Mohammed (the lead night auditor who had described four of Moloi’s visits & his odd activity just days before the murder), nor heard of Gary before being brought to court.  Moloi did admit to being in the back office of the Dupre, but that his friends/coworkers had invited him back there.  He did say that while he was in the back office that he did use the bathroom, and that he handled the cider bottle; in fact, Moloi also had slightly bled the bottle.  Oh yes, in contradiction of his own defense witnesses, Moloi suddenly did have injuries to his hands & leg, but he received them from a chain link fence, at a local park, while he was out jogging; the big bruise along Moloi’s shoulder was the result of a giant hickey.  Moloi stated that he never owned a pair of Adidas shows; the shoes seen in the security video were Nikes.  Likewise, Moloi has never owned a pair of gloves of any kind – much less the white cotton ones described by earlier witness.  As for the document presented to the DA by Troy Jones, Moloi also denied ever writing them.  Moloi did state on the evening of the murder, he had visited two other high school friends, at their homes, along with the “social call” he paid at the Dupre (one visit before going to the motel, one after); after these social visits, he popped into the AM/PM mini-mart, and returned to the Alosi residence (a little before or after midnight), and did not venture out again until going to see his other grandfather, the next morning.  Moloi did reiterate what his family said, about his school & housing being paid for and receiving regular pocket money, thus not being in need of cash.  As for his disappearing act during the days after the murder, he did that on the advice of his father & the attorney they hired (that attorney is not the one representing Moloi in court).  Moloi did want the jury to know that he had duel citizenship with another country (South Africa), but made no attempt to flee there.

 

Mr. Gundy began his cross-examination of Moloi by asking about school.  He asked how many units of class work Moloi had been enrolled in; it was not a full-time load.  Gundy asked when the last time was he attended any of the classes; it was September 25, 2002 – a whole month before the murders.  Moloi said that the class instructors viewed attendance at their lectures as optional, but could not name any of these instructors.  Moloi was then asked about CSUSB students that said Moloi owed them money; Moloi said they were lying.  Moloi was also asked about a student who stated she gave him a ride into Orange County on October 15th; that person was also lying (an earlier arrival is consistent with prosecution witnesses, and contradicts the defense).

 

Moloi was asked about the shoes he was wearing that night.  If they were Nikes like he said, could he produce them?  He said they were in storage somewhere.  If they were in storage, why hadn’t he produced them in the four years he had been incarcerated?  Moloi gave some answer about not expecting to be in jail so long; Gundy reminded Moloi that he had been denied bail early on, and that it had been made clear to him that the crimes he was charged with were robbery, and murder with special circumstances (which has minimum sentence of life, and the possibility of death).  Moloi then gave some reply about not trusting the Anaheim Police.

 

Moloi was asked what the names and address were of the other two people he visited on the 22nd; he could only remember their first names for certain, and was unable to give their addresses.  Besides, it turns out the people he “visited” weren’t home anyway.  Moloi was given ample time to explain his where abouts on the evening of the 22nd, and even allowed to draw a diagram for the jury.  However, when the times given at each place and the distances covered were added up, there were still hours unaccounted for.  Also, no one can confirm Moloi’s story of when he returned to the Alosi residence.

 

Moloi was also asked about his injuries to his legs.  He was asked to explain how he was able to injure those particular parts of his body on the fence.  He tried, but again, things just did not add up.  He was also asked to describe where he injured himself, on his body, but when compared to the photos taken by police, his account did not match.  He was also asked why, if he new he bled on the cider bottle, why didn’t he clean up after himself; Moloi did not have an answer.

 

Moloi once again stated that the document presented by Troy Jones the other day was not written by him.  Moloi did confirm, though, that the letters used (by the police handwriting expert) for comparison purposes were his.

 

Other questions followed this same pattern.  Either Moloi’s story just didn’t add up or everybody was wrong or lying (accept for Moloi, of course).

 

Probably the best part of the cross examination by Gundy was at the end, when a letter was brought into evidence – in Moloi’s handwriting.  It was to another former inmate of the Orange County jail.  The language used was not that of the preppy college kid (that the defense has been trying to portray), but that of a thug.  He spoke of communicating surreptitiously via code and through an attorney, and of wanting this former inmate to pay a female “star witness” for the prosecution “a visit”.  It was quite entertaining to watch Moloi try to weasel out of this letter.  He said that the letter was a reply to a letter he received, and could not explain the context without seeing the previous letter.  In trying to insist that this letter was a reply to another letter, he also stated that he had never initiated contact with the former inmate in question.  The letter (in Moloi’s handwriting) clearly states that he Moloi had previously called.  Moloi replied that no records would be found of such a call; however, while trying to explain that there was no need to use an attorney to convey secret messages, Moloi told the jury how calls could be made from jail with out leaving a record.  He also stated that he could have made no threat against a star witness, since there was no star witness (in Moloi’s opinion).

 

There was a little bit of redirect from the defense attorney, but Moloi was pretty much done (God willing, in more ways than one).

 

The defense rested; Gundy was given a chance at rebuttal.  Officers Duran, Palmer and Kazakos were called to the stand.  Duran testified that he was the officer that had initiated contact with Alosi on the 23rd of October, and had left his business card.  He also stated that he had Alosi’s permission to enter the home, and look for other people there; Duran did not disclose, though, that Moloi was a potential suspect in a murder.  Palmer testified that he had accompanied Duran to the Alosi residence; he did not leave a business card since Duran already had (a photo was displayed that showed Palmer with a thick mustache, he had at the time, that looks similar to Kazakos’).  Palmer was also asked about the park Moloi described hurting himself at; Palmer placed the park on a different street than Moloi, and in the middle of a block, not at a corner (he could not remember, though, if there was a large chain link fence there, at the time).  Kazakos then took the stand, and testified that he had not met Alosi until November 15, 2002; Sergeant Kazakos had documented all of his movements in relation to the case.

 

Aside from a stipulation being read to the jury, that someone had used Gary’s cell phone four days after his death, the evidentiary portion of the trial was done, and the jury was allowed to go home.  After they left, the lawyers went over exhibits and instructions to be given to the jury; this is all pretty routine legal-housekeeping stuff, so I left.  Besides, none of what was being said made sense to me; they were just calling out numbers that even the lawyers & the judge needed a book in front of them to understand the meaning of.

 

Final arguments begin at 9:30AM tomorrow.