BREAKING: #DanaRivers motion for new trial rejected. Afterwards, Rivers was sentenced to multiple terms of “25 years to life” in prison, including one without the possibility of parole. Rivers will spend life in prison, in other words.
I’ll offer more details later today. 1/
Today's proceedings began with the Judge discussing Rivers' request for a new trial. There were 26 complaints that Rivers made involving a misdirected jury, prosecutorial misconduct, and "insufficient evidence." The Judge went over them and dismissed them all as petty. 2/
Example: Rivers complained that he made a request to get a haircut, and the judge denied the request. In fact, the judge tried to obtain a haircut for Rivers, but was unable to do so in a safe way. Also, wtf, why does that matter?? 3/
ex: Rivers thought that the use of the terms "defendant" and "victims" prejudiced the jury. The Judge pointed out that these are completely appropriate terms.
I mean, seriously??
4/
Rivers' defense argued that the judge said he wouldn't show a wedding pic of Reed and Wright, but then went on to show one anyway. The judge points out that the photo displayed was informal; he just didn't want a formal pic displayed. Also, nobody objected at the time. 5/
Judge goes on to dismiss allegations that he withheld evidence dealing with Reed's personal life and Rivers' mental health records. He also dismisses the claim that he mishandled evidence about Rivers tattoos (tattoos have been one of the most tedious aspects of the trial IMO).6/
Judge dismisses the claim that having Rivers enter in a wheelchair prejudiced the jury (the idea being that the wheelchair shows Rivers was being incarcerated). He says there is no other way for Rivers to enter, and in any case it's irrelevant. 7/
Judge dismisses Rivers' allegation that there was something wrong with him (the judge) having to Zoom in during the insanity phase due to covid. Points out that nobody objected at the time. 8/
Finally, the judge dismisses what is quite possibly Rivers' most absurd allegation, namely that the jury had "insufficient evidence" to come to their verdict. He says, rather, that the evidence was overwhelming. 9/
After dismissing Rivers' petition for a new trial, the Judge moves on to sentencing. 10/
The prosecutor reads a statement from Richard, Patricia Wright's brother. It's a powerful statement, talking about how he (Richard) got PTSD after seeing the crime seeing, causing him serious health problems that prevented him from going to trial in person. 11/
Richard, in his statement, highlights the heinousness of the crime and how disgusting it is that Rivers has done everything possible to drag out this case. Rivers, in Richard's words, prioritizes "entitlement and narcissism over basic human decency." 12/
Richard also discusses his sister Patricia by saying she, as a middle child, was a peacemaker who showed him tremendous kindness. She was also an artist, having been working on a portrait of Richard and his daughter shortly before her murder. 13/
Richard explains how Patricia's coming out as lesbian was difficult for the family, and how he (Richard) was described as her ally. 14/
It was clear that everyone in the room was profoundly affected by Richard's words, and the judge personally praises the statement, and tells the prosecutor to make sure Richard hears his praise.
This was one of the most powerful moments of the entire trial IMO. 15/
Judge says that, while he believes in "hate the crime, love the criminal," this was the most heinous crime he's had to adjudicate in his 33-year career. He goes on to issue multiple "25 years to life" sentences, including one without parole (due to "special circumstances"). 16/
There were also various shorter sentences for the arson, weapons charges, etc.
At the request of the defense attorney, restitution funds were reduced to $1000 due to Rivers being broke.
17/
Looking over my notes now, I think the judge issued the sentence *before* he made the comment about this being his worst case --- the comment about this being the worst case in his career was in the context of explaining Rivers' appeal rights. 18/
The judge concludes by briefly talking about Rivers' next step: prison. Does mention San Quentin, but this could be for processing rather than a final destination.
19/
(In other words, don't get your hopes up about Rivers potentially being sent to a men's prison). 20/
Side note: this was the first day of the River's trial where masks were no longer required in the courthouse. Rivers was the only person still wearing one. 21/
As far as I could tell, @BerkeleyScanner was the only press there. 22/
Thank you, everyone, for following our coverage! 23/
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-9-22 (week 2 day 4): This was the most dramatic day so far imo, in terms of lawyers going at each other with objections, as well as the witness testimony. It's also apparently the last day of evidence, which is why we got out early. 1/
The day starts on an almost comical note. Instead of continuing with Sandra, an expert witness testifies virtually on screen at home with a crying baby. He is an expert on the ethnography of tattoos and teaches in Criminal Justice sciences at Illinois State. 2/
He talks about the research he's done with people who get tattoos, as well as tattoo artists. He has seen pictures of the tattoos Rivers has. He says you cannot read much significance into tattoos without knowing more info — the same tattoo can mean different things 3/
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-9-22 (week 2 day 3): This day started slow, but got exciting later, so please read through the whole thread 🧐. Day starts with defense doing cross-x of ballistics expert Lau. Mostly just technical questions, nothing significant imho. 1/
Next witness is Timothy Latibeaudiere from the Oakland Police Department. His testimony was very brief --- he just mentioned how he discovered a bloody orange lighter near the bloody fence at the victims' house. There were also footprints nearby. 2/
It's clarified that in fact there were *two* orange lighters discovered at the scene, the one near the fence that the witness T.L. discovered, and one found inside. During defense cross-x, T.L. also answers that he did see an RV parked nearby. That's all for this witness. 3/
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-8-22 (week 2 day 2): first witness is Dr. Tom Rogers, who did the autopsies on Reed and Diambu in the coroner’s office. He goes through the various injuries found on Reed, with graphic images of them. He says there were blunt force injuries, stab 1/
wounds, and 2 gunshot wounds. The gunshot wounds had “stippling,” or marks from gunpowder that are present when the gun is fired close to the victim. Also, they both had hemorrhaging, meaning Reed was still alive when shot both times. 2/
Reed had over 40 stab/incise wounds. Some of them had hemorrhaging, and others didn’t, meaning that the assailant stabbed Reed while she was still alive and continued to stab her after she died. 3/
The People vs. #DanaRivers, 11-7-22 (week 2 day 1): Criminologist Helena Wong, who did the DNA testing of the case, continues her testimony. Prosecution asks Wong if she can tell Rivers is trans based on DNA. Wong says yes because DNA reveals "biological gender," 1/
which is male in Rivers' case. This is the first time during the trial that Rivers' trans status is disclosed. Wong & the prosecution go on to talk about the results of DNA tests taken of blood stains from the scene of the crime, as well as from items at the crime scene. 2/
One swab has Diambu's DNA. Most of the rest had Rivers' DNA, Reed's DNA, or a mix. However, the slide of the pistol had 2 DNA donors, neither of which were the victims or Rivers. One of the unknown donors was male and the other's sex was undetermined. 3/
Today I attended opening statements for the Dana Rivers trial. One thing that is surprising is that the defense is NOT using the insanity defense, at least not so far. They genuinely want to show there isn't enough evidence. How are they doing that? 1/
They point out that Dana Rivers' DNA is not found on the firearms. They claim that the fact that Rivers used gloves isn't sufficient, because Rivers' had a cut and was bleeding all over the house. They also said that DNA from an unknown person was found in the house 2/
so it sounds like they are trying to insinuate that some other random person was involved in the killing. Three witnesses were called: the neighbor who made the police call, and the first two police who came to the scene of the crime. Defense keeps trying to nitpick to find 3/