The defense for the former sheriff’s deputy accused of raping
four women has filed for a mistrial while alleging the judge has
displayed bias in his attitude and what he has allowed as
admissible in the trial, and Judge Alan Hedegard is set to possibly
rule on the motion this afternoon.
HOLLISTER
The defense for the former sheriff’s deputy accused of raping four women has filed for a mistrial while alleging the judge has displayed bias in his attitude and what he has allowed as admissible in the trial, and Judge Alan Hedegard is set to possibly rule on the motion this afternoon.
Defense attorney Art Cantu filed the motion for a mistrial today shortly before 9 a.m. In it, he contends the visiting judge “is prejudiced against the defendant Michael Rodrigues.”
The former sheriff’s sergeant is accused of raping four women between 1999 and 2007. A grand jury indicted him alleging three of the charges, while prosecutors added a fourth suspected victim in the fall of 2008. The trial started Sept. 9, while the jury could start deliberations as early as Friday.
In the document, the defense cites such portions of the proceedings as Hedegard disallowing use of a declaration from one of the suspected victims “that she was pressured by the sheriff’s investigators into making her accusations,” among other items the judge ruled as inadmissible that Cantu cited in the document.
Cantu also criticized Hedegard’s demeanor and pointed out, among other allegations that he alleged show bias, how the judge asked if any jurors had not known the distance from Hollister to Fort Ord, and for anybody who hadn’t know to raise their hands. The defense had been questioning one of the witness’ statements that she had been raped by another peace officer there June 1 and that she contended to have been with Rodrigues on June 3.
“This now leaves the defense with a high risk that the juror’s were given permission to conduct their own investigation into the length and distance to Fort Ord,” it reads.
Deputy District Attorney Patrick Palacios argued that a state penal code section allows the trial to continue after such filings, which would be dealt with after the current proceeding.
“This is a stunt to delay the inevitable,” Palacios argued. “This is sour grapes. This is ridiculous.”
He went on: “Any delay is going to prejudice the people’s case.”
While both attorneys offered objections at several points and raised their voices at times, Cantu said Rodrigues is “entitled to a fair trial.”
“Even if you think he’s guilty,” Cantu said to Palacios, and then Hedegard, “we have to do this right.”
Hedegard had excused jurors this morning to allow arguments over Cantu’s filing. He noted to attorneys how he had put a call in to the State Administrative Office of the Courts for a recommendation on how to proceed and he expected to hear back before 1 p.m.
Below is video of opening statements from the trial.
