1:45 am MT: The judge is on the bench and starts reading her verdict. She begins with Count 2, a firearm charge related to Oscar's shooting his gun through the sunroof. Samantha Taylor and another friend were in the vehicle and testified. The witnesses' versions were very different. Oscar denied shooting the gun through the open sunroof. She reviews both the state and defense arguments on the charge. She says she will scrutinize the witnesses' statements.
The only thing the witnesses' accounts had in common was that they both said a shot had been fired. Fresno was a dishonest witness. He lied. Mendacity on one aspect does not necessarily mean the rest of the evidence is tainted. It means caution is warranted. However, Fresno could not say where the incident happened. He said he could point it out to the police. Under cross, he stated when he was he was taken to the scene, he could only point it out after the cop had driven him past it four times.
Taylor was a jilted girlfriend who claimed the relationship ended when Oscar cheated on her. Still, that just means her testimony must be viewed with caution.
Taylor's version has a ring of truth but that isn't the end of the matter. It's whether the state proved it beyond a reasonable doubt.
The defendant has no onus to prove his innocence. He denied the charge. The state's witnesses contradicted each other on crucial elements. The evidence falls short of the required standard. The state failed to prove Oscar guilty on this count. He is acquitted.
Next gun count: when Oscar shot his gun in the restaurant. A friend gave Oscar the firearm under the table and told him there was a bullet in the chamber. It went off within minutes. He asked if everyone was fine. He later asked the friend to take the blame for the discharge. When the owners approached, the friend told them it had fallen off his trousers. It was lunchtime and the restaurant was crowded. Oscar admitted asking his friend to see the firearm as he was going to buy a similar model. He testified he didn't know it was loaded. The shot went off accidentally.
In her view, it doesn't matter what caused the gun to go off. No one has alleged intent. Oscar may not have intentionally pulled the trigger, but that doesn't absolve him of negligently handling the firearm in a situation where it posed a risk.
She mentions witness Kevin Larina, and says he was not biased. His testimony is accepted. She accepts the evidence of the restaurant owners. Oscar was sufficiently trained in the use of firearms which includes proper handling. This count is proved. Guilty.
Count 4: Unlawful possession of ammunition at his house. State must prove Oscar had the necessary mens rea -- the intent to possess a firearm or ammunition (here, ammunition.) For example, if a person who has no license for a firearm, were to pick up a gun someone had left behind solely to return it, he would not be guilty. Oscar said the ammunition belonged to his father and that he didn't mean to possess it. The state needed to present evidence to the contrary. It did not do so, so Oscar's version in uncontroverted. He's acquitted.
In conclusion:
- Murder Count 1: Not guilty. She recites her reasons from yesterday and is even stronger that the evidence supported Oscar's version and the state failed to prove its case. He's also not guilty through application of dolus eventualis. She cites a legal treatise and case law. But, she says, he was negligent, and therefore is guilty of culpable homicide.
- Count 2: Firearm (sunroof): Not Guilty
- Count 3: Firearm (restaurant): Guilty
- Count 4: Ammunition possession: Not Guilty
Sentencing will be at a later date. I don't see any reason his bond won't continue.