Defendant’s alibi based on viewing racy, sexy videos
AIRPORT COURTHOUSE — The attorney for a 21-year-old Santa Monica man on trial for attempting to murder two undercover police officers argued here Monday that his client is the victim of mistaken identity, that he was at home watching racy videos when the shooting took place.
Rather than arresting Michael German Espindola, Santa Monica detectives should have paid more attention to his cousin, who is truly responsible for firing at least three shots at officers and whose DNA was found on the handgun recovered in an apartment shared by the two men, said defense attorney David Diamond.
“Mr. Espindola is not that man who committed this horrific crime,” Diamond said during an opening statement in which he portrayed Espindola as a former “SM17” gang member who had dropped out after cooperating with police on a double homicide at the Moose Lodge in Sunset Park.
“If there is anything worse than firing at a police officer,” Diamond added, “it’s charging the wrong person with this (attempted) murder.”
Espindola has plead not guilty to two counts of attempted murder, two counts of assault with a firearm, one count of shooting at an occupied vehicle and one count of unlawful firearm activity.
In addition, prosecutors claim Espindola committed the crimes to further the activities of a criminal street gang.
Espindola has been held on $2.4 million bail and could face life in prison if convicted, according to the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s Office.
The shooting occurred around 5 a.m., near the corner of 20th Street and Pico Boulevard on Feb. 2, 2006.
SMPD Officer Walter Ramirez, who had been on the force for just over three years at the time, was driving an unmarked police vehicle with his partner when they slowly rolled up on a dark blue van parked in a driveway in the Pico Neighborhood, police said. The two officers, who were not in uniform, were assigned to burglary suppression.
As they got near the van to get a closer look at the occupants, a Latino man came out from the front of the van and fired six shots, one of them striking Ramirez in the right wrist, causing a “through and through” wound, according to police. The bullet just missed Ramirez’ partner, who ducked when he heard the bullets fly.
The officers did not return fire. Instead, they drove quickly from the scene, radioed for help and parked at a nearby restaurant and waited for an ambulance to arrive.
Officers responding to a call of shots fired, surrounded the van and arrested Espindola’s stepfather, who was in the driver’s seat. A SWAT team was sent to Espindola’s apartment building in the 1900 block of 17th Street near Santa Monica College. A few hours later, at around 6:15 a.m., officers were able to negotiate the surrender of Espindola and his cousin.
In his brief opening statement, prosecutor Frank Tavelman told jurors that at least two SMPD officers identified Espindola — not his cousin — as the trigger man, including one of the officers who was shot at, and that a gun used in the crime was found in the apartment Espindola shared with his mother, step-father, younger brother and his cousin.
“We feel confident you jurors will be able to make a decision that is beyond a reasonable doubt,” said Tavelman, as he urged jurors to “keep an open mind.”
“Not the one finger kind.” — Herman said
“It was a friendly wave,”
While a handgun found in his apartment has been linked to the shooting by ballistics, there is no DNA evidence that proves Espindola was the shooter or had ever come in contact with the gun, Diamond countered.
No fingerprints were found on the weapon and Espindola did not have gunpowder residue on his hands, said Diamond, as he too asked jurors “to keep an open mind”and consider the possibility that the SMPD detectives investigating the case “got it wrong.”
Diamond said he plans to call a computer expert to testify that Espindola was using his computer at the time of the shooting. He plans to also call a DNA expert, and Espindola’s mother and younger brother, who said they saw Espindola at his computer after being awakened by gunshots. ‘17’ REASONS Wearing a dark blue dress shirt and dark slacks, Espindola sat in his chair and closely monitored the proceedings on Monday, occasionally writing notes on a yellow piece of paper while whispering to his attorney. He appeared pale and clean shaven with closely cropped hair — looking more the part of an innocent high schooler than a seasoned gang member on trial for attempted murder.
His appearance was in stark contrast to a photo of Espindola that the prosecution showed to jurors. In the picture, Espindola is wearing a flannel, long sleeve shirt and baggy khakis. His hair is shaved and he has a thick mustache and long goatee.
In other photos of Espindola in jail, tattoos of the number “17,”along with “Santa Monica,” were clearly visible, evidence that Espindola was,or at one time,part of a street gang in Santa Monica known as “SM17,”said Tavelman.
In pretrial motions, Tavelman suggested that Espindola may have fired on the officers because he thought they were rival gang members looking to kill him, or he may have done it to regain the trust of his fellow gang members.
While questioning his first witness, Sgt. Gary Herman, a 25-year-veteran of the SMPD, Tavelman tried to paint a picture of Espindola as a gang member who had several contacts with law enforcement, Harman in particular.
Herman was the supervising officer on the night of the shooting and said he had observed Espindola and his stepfather at the Ralph’s parking lot and on Cloverfield Boulevard shortly after they left the grocery store. At that time, Espindola waved at him.
When he heard shots had been fired and that a blue van was involved, Herman said he knew immediately it was Espindola and his stepfather, and dispatched officers to their apartment. He then said he met with the injured officer and his partner, who picked Espindola out of a photo lineup.
During cross examination, Herman admitted that he lost sight of the van for about 15 minutes after it left the Ralph’s parking lot, but located it on Cloverfield Boulevard, where he said Espindola waved at him.
“You lost sight of the vehicle. Is it possible that there could have been a change in occupancy?” asked Diamond.
“Yes,” Herman replied. Diamond also questioned why Herman did not show the officers who were shot at pictures of Espindola’s father in the photo lineup, suggesting that Herman had already made up his mind as to who the shooter was.
Diamond tried to suggest that the targeted officers may have been fired upon because they were in an unmarked car, driving slowly in known gang territory and questioned Herman as to why officers with only five years on the job between them would be assigned to such a duty.
“They are two of our best guys,” Herman said of the officers.
“They drove into an ambush,” he added. “They were innocent. They had no control at all, except maybe not coming to work that day.”
Originally published in the Santa Monica Daily Press print edition on January 9, 2007. Read the original PDF.