Another court date was set Friday in the process of deciding where the Renato Hughes murder trial will be held. After retired Superior Court Judge William A. McKinstry granted a court venue change Thursday, Nov. 15, all parties wait on the state Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to make an official recommendation for a new venue. Lake County Superior Court Judge Arthur H. Mann continued the matter to 8:15 a.m. Jan. 4, 2008 in Dept. 3 of the Lake County courthouse in Lakeport.
Hughes” San Francisco defense attorney Stuart Hanlon filed a motion objecting to Mann hearing the venue matter and recommending three counties to hear Hughes” murder trial. The motion was not heard Friday, Hanlon said, and will likely be discussed Jan. 4. Hanlon recommended the counties of Solano, Alameda and San Francisco.
Mann told the defense and prosecution that the AOC is considering Los Angeles and San Diego counties as possible court venues to try Hughes. The former San Francisco resident is charged under the Provocative Act doctrine for the deaths of two companions, who were shot in the back Dec. 7, 2005 as they fled the Clearlake Park home of Shannon Edmonds. The clause holds co-conspirators responsible in the commission of a felony if the action was likely to provoke deadly resistance.
Outside the courtroom Friday, Hanlon pointed to McKinstry”s original ruling as a factor in deciding where the trial will be heard. The ruling reads, in part, “…the status of the accused weighs in favor of the change of venue, especially given his minority status and the small percentage of the population of African Americans in Lake County …”. Lake County”s population was 2.2 percent black in 2005, below the California state average of 6.7 percent, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Lake County District Attorney Jon Hopkins offered a different opinion in a follow-up interview. “He (McKinstry) added up the number (of potential jurors) that were excused and concluded that the defendant could not get a fair trial. He didn”t recognize that a substantial number of those were excused by the prosecution. Keep in mind that only two out of hundreds were excused because they couldn”t be fair based on race.”
Hanlon said race was a factor in jury selection that began in October, based on answers to a question posed to potential jurors. “The question was, ”do you think racial discrimination is how big a problem it is in Northern California?” And so many of our answers were, ”not in my world.” … Of course it”s not in your world when your world is all white and there”s no discrimination against you and you don”t see it because there”s no black people or Spanish people to even see it against.”
“In my opinion this is an entirely unnecessary burden on Lake County taxpayers, because we went through four weeks of jury selection, and none of the issues the defense claimed would prevent a Lake County jury from being fair ever materialized,” Hopkins said. Transportation out of county and living expenses for the prosecution team are among the expenses taxpayers would bear, Hopkins said.
Contact Tiffany Revelle at trevelle@record-bee.com.
