STACY BARKER FOUND GUILTY ON THREE COUNTS!

Emma Leigh Barker RIP

A Lancaster CA jury convicted Stacey Barker today on 3 counts:

1ST - DEGREE MURDER!!!!!! 

ASSAULT ON A CHILD CAUSING

GREAT BODILY INJURY OR DEATH!!!! 

CHILD ABUSE ON CHILD UNDER 8 YEARS OF AGE!!!

Sentencing for Barker will take place on June 17, 2011

Here is a list from the California penal code:

California - First-degree Murder

Title 8, Ch. 1, Sec. 187; 188-190

PENAL CODE
SECTION 187-199

187.  (a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.
   (b) This section shall not apply to any person who commits an act
that results in the death of a fetus if any of the following apply:
   (1) The act complied with the Therapeutic Abortion Act, Article 2
(commencing with Section 123400) of Chapter 2 of Part 2 of Division
106 of the Health and Safety Code.
   (2) The act was committed by a holder of a physician's and surgeon'
s certificate, as defined in the Business and Professions Code, in a
case where, to a medical certainty, the result of childbirth would be
death of the mother of the fetus or where her death from childbirth,
although not medically certain, would be substantially certain or
more likely than not.
   (3) The act was solicited, aided, abetted, or consented to by the
mother of the fetus.
   (c) Subdivision (b) shall not be construed to prohibit the
prosecution of any person under any other provision of law.


188.  Such malice may be express or implied.  It is express when
there is manifested a deliberate intention unlawfully to take away
the life of a fellow creature.  It is implied, when no considerable
provocation appears, or when the circumstances attending the killing
show an abandoned and malignant heart.
   When it is shown that the killing resulted from the intentional
doing of an act with express or implied malice as defined above, no
other mental state need be shown to establish the mental state of
malice aforethought.  Neither an awareness of the obligation to act
within the general body of laws regulating society nor acting despite
such awareness is included within the definition of malice.

189.  All murder which is perpetrated by means of a destructive
device or explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of
ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal or armor, poison,
lying in wait, torture, or by any other kind of willful, deliberate,
and premeditated killing, or which is committed in the perpetration
of, or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, carjacking, robbery,
burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable
under Section 206, 286, 288, 288a, or 289, or any murder which is
perpetrated by means of discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle,
intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the
intent to inflict death, is murder of the first degree.  All other
kinds of murders are of the second degree.
   As used in this section, "destructive device" means any
destructive device as defined in Section 12301, and "explosive" means
any explosive as defined in Section 12000 of the Health and Safety
Code.
   As used in this section, "weapon of mass destruction" means any
item defined in Section 11417.
   To prove the killing was "deliberate and premeditated," it shall
not be necessary to prove the defendant maturely and meaningfully
reflected upon the gravity of his or her act.

189.5.  (a) Upon a trial for murder, the commission of the homicide
by the defendant being proved, the burden of proving circumstances of
mitigation, or that justify or excuse it, devolves upon the
defendant, unless the proof on the part of the prosecution tends to
show that the crime committed only amounts to manslaughter, or that
the defendant was justifiable or excusable.
   (b) Nothing in this section shall apply to or affect any
proceeding under Section 190.3 or 190.4.

190.  (a) Every person guilty of murder in the first degree shall be
punished by death, imprisonment in the state prison for life without
the possibility of parole, or imprisonment in the state prison for a
term of 25 years to life.

 Assault on a Child Causing Death

273ab.  Any person who, having the care or custody
of a child who is under eight years of age,
assaults the child by means of force that
to a reasonable person would be likely
to produce great bodily injury,
resulting in the child's death, shall be
punished by imprisonment in the state
prison for 25 years to life.
Nothing in this section shall be
construed as affecting the applicability
of subdivision (a) of Section 187
or Section 189. 

 

Child Abuse

273a.(a) Any person who, under circumstances or 
conditions likely to produce great 
bodily harm or death, willfully causes
or permits any child to suffer, or inflicts 
thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental 
suffering, or having the care or custody of any child,
willfully causes or permits the person or health
of that child to be injured, or willfully causes or 
permits that child to be placed in a situation 
where his or her person or health is endangered. 
 
A child abuse charge in CA is considered a "wobbler"
(can be charged as a misdemeanor or felony
 depending on the facts in the case) if prosecuted
as a misdemeanor shall be punished by 
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding 
one year and a $6000 fine, if prosecuted
as a felony and there is a conviction the
penalty is  in the state prison for
two, four, or six years.
 
Last but not least, another great big thanks to 
Tori, Ange, Gabe,
 Tiff, Anurse, and LCM for 
taking time from your busy lives to attend 
these hearings the last 2 years and this 3 week trial! 
You are Emma's Angels!
 

Thanks to LCM for this sweet picture of Emma!

Sphere: Related Content

Stacey Barker Murder Case - The Jury Has the Case!

The murder case of Stacey Marie Barker,26, of Lancaster, CA was given to the jury today, Monday, May 23rd.  Deputy District Attorney Kelly Cromer  presented her first closing argument on Friday, May 20th. Today, Stacey Barker's Public Defender Roberto Dager presented his closing argument before Kelly Cromer wrapped up the trial with her second closing.

The jury only had the case for 2 hours today so there isn't a verdict yet...maybe tomorrow will be the day we learn the fate of Stacey Barker? Will she be spending the rest of her life as an inmate of CA Department of Corrections or will she get the minimum 25 years if she's convicted of the top charges? To keep it real, there is also the possibility she will be acquitted. Many think Stacey hurt her chances for that acquittal by taking the stand on her own behalf, against her lawyer's advice no less. Personally, I would be satisfied with either of the first 2 options, I think it would be Justice for Emma if Stacey Barker never has the chance to procreate again...she blew her chance to be a good parent for her beautiful little girl. I have felt for sometime that Stacey killed her daughter Emma and the things that have come out during this trial have only confirmed my opinion.

Wednesday will be exactly the 3rd week of this trial. I can say without any reservation if they want to cut the trial to 1 day short of 3 weeks that wouldn't bother me one bit. The jury will decide what is Justice for Emma Leigh Barker.

Hopefully, today, the jurors were able to select a jury foreman and review the instructions given to them by Judge Hayden Zackey so they can come in tomorrow and start reviewing the evidence. They must understand the elements of each charge before they can decide what has been proven beyond a reaonable doubt, if anything. Roberto Dager reminded the jury today that the law says, if they find there are 2 plausible theories, they must select the theory most favorable to the defendant. What he said is true but 2 things come to mind...to be plausible there must be no "reasonable" doubt and it is possible there could be no theories that benefit the defendant.

If you have been trying to follow the case here, you know that things didn't go as planned with our coverage. LeftCoastMom aka LCM had planned on going to Lancaster for at least a part of the trial and we were going to share our coverage. Unfortunately, things didn't work out for LCM going to CA.
There are some things in life more important than being a trial junkie............
(hehe, there...I said it....we are trial junkies and if you are reading this and following any other
case(s) you are possibly a trial junkie too ٩(͡๏̮͡๏)۶ whoot! ).
I'm glad LCM made the decision to take care of her own needs first. LCM has been able to get out and about to some of the boards, such as Reality Chatter, with some of the details she gathered from Tori. That's great, and I'm sure very much appreciated!

Tori was giving me extensive notes through the 7th or 8th day of trial via a 3 hour phone conversation each night. After the I realized (finally accepted the fact) there was no way I could catch up with the Q&A, play by play coverage that Tori was providing, I quit taking extensive notes and we just chatted...but it was still a 2-3 hour conversation.  I just love that girl, she has a sharp wit, a kind heart, and a near total recall memory .... a perfect combination.for blogging, but for one thing...she doesn't like to write. LOL! In Tori's own words, "Girl, I'm  not a writer, I'm a storyteller!" I on the other hand love to do both, but time has been my enemy ๏̯͡๏.

The mainstream media has been pretty much non existent beyond the first month or so after Emma's death, that is except for Craig Currier of the Antelope Valley Press, he has attended most of the pretrial hearings over the last 2 years. Tori said the court allowed Craig to take still photos in the courtroom today and the media will be able to bring television cameras into the courtroom so that they can record when the verdict is read.


Thankfully, Tori has been kind enough to come in each day and  leave a summary of the day in court in the comments section. I hope you have read her updates. Here are links to the posts she commented on.

We will provide coverage of Stacey barker murder trial

Day one, Wednesday, April 27 - Opening Statements
                                                 Sue Barker's testimony

Day two, Thursday, April 28 -  Day two of testimony Sphere: Related Content

Stacy Barker Murder Trial Set To Get Under Way? Will it be April or Will It Be May?

Stacey Barker 2009 booking photo

Stacey Barker is a 26 year old Quartz Hills, CA woman accused of killing her 18 month old daughter 2 years ago. During this time, friends of Katfish....Ponders  have been attending the pretrial hearings and sharing what they see and hear. Once again I want to thank these caring women Toria, Ange, Tiffany Diamond, ANurse, and LeftCoastMom for taking time out of their busy lives to attend the hearings.

Anyone who has been following this case will understand the reason I wrote the title to this post as a question, there has been a lot of delays...trial dates set and postponed, failed plea deal negotiations, and more, more, more delays. I'm to the point that I won't believe this trial is happening until I know that a jury has been seated. What I want to do in this post is update you on some recent hearings and what we do know about the (alleged) upcoming trial. :)

                   ~ Case Background  ~

On March 18, 2009 at about 11:00 P.M., Stacey Barker's brother Nick made a 911 call to report his sister was at a Park n Ride (PnR) in Palmdale, CA and needed assistance. He reported his sister had called him for help. We don't know exactly what Stacey told her brother when she called him, but he and her (then?) boyfriend Brendon were already at the PnR when police arrived 3 minutes after the 911 call.

Precious Emma Leigh Barker

  Stacey Barker told police she was attacked as she was loading her 18 month old daughter, Emma Leigh Barker, into her car at the Lancaster, CA city park (after playtime). Barker reported the next thing she can recall was "coming to" 6 hours later at the Palmdale PnR about 15 miles from the Lancaster park,  and realized she was injured, only partially clothed, and her baby,, Emma, was missing....Detectives said that Barker did have injuries consistent with a struggle, including bruises on her head and was taken to the hospital for treatment.

Authorities say after making various inconsistent statements, Barker finally admitted making up the abduction story and inflicting the wounds on herself. She said Emma died accidentally, but fearing she would be blamed for Emma's death, she panicked and left her daughter's body in some tall grass near a freeway. Some 12 hours later, Barker led police to Emma’s body, where she had dumped her,  in a grassy lot near the Golden State Freeway in Sylmar, CA.

On April 23, 2009 Barker was arrested at her grandparents home, where she had reportedly began staying sometime after Emma's death. She has been incarcerated at the Central Regional Detention Center since her arrest. Barker was appointed a public defender, Roberto F. Dager(RD). Her bail was set at 1 million dollars. The charges filed against the young mother include Second-Degree Murder, Assault on a Child Causing Death and one count of Child Abuse. The complaint alleges that Barker willfully caused and permitted the child to be injured and harmed and that injury resulted in death. The state of California alleges that Barker suffocated her daughter. Stacey Barker(SB) formally entered a not guilty plea to all counts on August 12, 2009. Representing the state in this case is Los Angeles County Deputy District Attorney S. "Kelly" Cromer(KC). The judge overseeing this case is Superior Court Judge Hayden Zackey (JZ).

              ~ Recent Case Developments ~

Even though there has been a number of hearings in the last month in preparation for trial, there really hasn't been much new to report until last week. To be honest the hearings have mainly consisted of a lot of bickering between the state and the defense over discovery, witnesses and outstanding motions....normal trial stuff although I'm surprised a lot of this wasn't completed long ago. Judge Zackey has been more than liberal...in my opinion ...especially with the defense. If Stacey Barker is convicted, she shouldn't have grounds to appeal based on ineffective counsel. Mr Dager has provided her with a very vigorous defense and filed every kind of motion you can think of. As a true crime and trial junkie, Katfish ponders has often wondered if law school includes a course on whining...if that course is offered, Roberto Dager was probably his teacher's pet. LOL!

This is what Tori had to say about the hearing on March 24, "Another slow ride on the Justice train, although Kelly makes it worth the wait, she is Awesome!"
I don't think Ms. Cromer would mind if I referred to her as a bulldog (She is a dog breeder and active in dog shows in her personal life). From what the girls tell me, Cromer doesn't give Dager an inch, and if she has to bark loud to be heard over Dager's whining she lets it rip. Perhaps a more tactful way to put it is they are both "passionate" about their adversarial roles. LOL!

The "debates" between the state and defense at this hearing were primarily about expert witnesses for both parties. Kelly Cromer asked Roberto Dager (once again) about getting a report from Dr. Harry Bonnell.

Dager told the court that Cromer has talked to Bonnell and she knows what he is going to say.
KC said "Dr. Bonnell was supposed to be here for a "402" your honor"
JZ asks RD, " Where is he?"
Dager replied, " I am not going to have him come here from San Diego just for this special occasion".(We didn't understand that remark??) RD continued," I want to know why you are singling me out. I thought you were going to do a 402 with Ribe too? She knows everything I know!."
KC said, " Your honor, does he expect this court to believe he does not know what his own witness is going to testify to? He is just trying to stall the case and drag his feet again and I would ask the court that if I don't have what Dr.Bonnell is going to testify to, that he be excluded as a witness.
JZ said, "Mr. Dager, just have Dr. Bonnell write a small report and give it or email it to KC."

(According to my notes, KC was asking RD for Dr. Bonnell's report as far back as February 2010. At that time RD told the court, that Dr. Bonnell, a Forensic Pathologist will testify there are tests that Dr. Ribe (Los Angeles County Deputy Coroner James K. Ribe) failed to perform on Emma that would change the cause and manner of death but wouldn't elaborate.) 

Next RD said something about KC talking to Dr.Ribe about the mistakes she said Dr. Ribe made...oooooohhhh she (KC ) yelled," I DID NOT SAY HE MADE ANY MISTAKES! YOUR HONOR WHAT I SAID WAS I FOUND SOMETHING IN THE REPORT THAT I MISSED, BUT IT WAS THERE THE ENTIRE TIME! I do not want it in the press that I said Dr. Ribe made a mistake! RD knows that is not what I said, but he wants to say that in court so people will think that is what was said,  and no, I have not talked to the Dr. at this time.

There was some other discussions about discovery and another witness but what I have told you so far should give you an idea about how this hearing went. Cromer and Dager did not agree on ANYTHING!
Judge Zackey told the parties he has a trial the rest of the week so the next hearing will be on 4/1, then he'll rule on the motions that were brought up earlier in the case. (?) The judge said he wants to set the trial date for the week of April 4th, noting that might change if the trial he has in progress goes longer and the hearing was over. 


The April 1 hearing started out with Judge Zackey telling Roberto Dager and Kelly Cromer that today they will all act professionally......adding he was glad he had DECAF today. ( Emphasis mine.This judge has been very lenient IMO )

Kelly Cromer told the court that Dr.Bonnell still hasn't given his statement and he's not here today as the court ordered, so she asks that Dr. Bonnell be excluded as a witness. Judge Zackey told Dager to call Dr.Bonnell and ask him to submit the report.

RD said " I AM NOT GOING TO CALL HIM". The state knows what I know. They have talked to him, they know what he is going to say. I am not going to call him.
JZ asked RD, "So...are you going to be calling him as a witness?" RD said, " I can't say yet."
JZ told RD, " It sounds like you are not going to use him as a witness."
JZ then asked if Dr. Bonnell was going to say something different then Dr.Ribe?
RD told the judge," Dr. Bonnell will say the same thing as Dr. Ribe, that there is no conclusive cause of death."

KC said, "I am tired of him misstating the facts your honor! Dr.Ribe has a cause and manner of death and it's in the the Coroners report."
RD said, " Dr.Ribes opinion was influenced by the Sheriff's office and they led him to conclude the manner of death was a homicide."
JZ told RD he will have to give KC a statement from DB by 1:30PM today or he is going to start imposing sanctions per sec 1054..he goes on to outline sanctions that can be imposed.....

We don't know what RD objected to but he said he vigorously OBJECTS to that! JZ said," I'll tell you what I'll do, I'll have my reporter put it in the Record in BOLD and UNDERLINED that you OBJECT! (Yep, good thing he had decaf )

We're not sure who brought it up, but the conversation shifts....there are two 6 pack photo line ups that a witness has made an ID on. The person(s) who was identified in the photo line ups was reportedly at the Park n Ride on March 18. RD said something about a conspiracy and asks why is this just being brought up now? Dager tells the court he wants copies of the 6 packs and some phone records. The state contends there was a flurry of text messages they want in at trial. JZ said that he would sign a order for the phone company to give Dager the records within a week.

Tori said she doesn't know if BB (Stacey's boyfriend) got a phone call or had to use the restroom, but he got up and left the courtroom when this discussion about PnR was brought up, he did, however, come right back. There will be more discussion about this photo lineup at a future hearing.(BB hasn't attended another hearing since....which wouldn't necessarily be remarkable, except that he has attended nearly every hearing up to this point.)
Discussion returns to Dr. Bonnell. Judge Zackey tells both sides they will go "In Camera".  The judge, the court reporter, and both sides leave for a bit. When they come back, JZ asks RD," OK, so you will not be calling Dr. Bonnell as a witness, is that right?" RD said, " No, I will not be calling Dr. Bonnell.....

JZ said that the next court date is 4/11 adding they have 10 days to start the trial from that date. JZ thinks that jury selection may take more than the 1 or 2 days ( the norm?) , but the trial he is in right now is going at a snails pace so he doesn't mention an actual date for the trial to start..(T, did I get this right from your notes?)

JZ is about to wrap up the hearing when RD said, " There are 2 defense witnesses in the court today." JZ asked them to stand and state their names and spell them for the court reporter. One is Amber Barela, a friend and co-worker of Stacey. We don't know why she is on the witness list. Earlier in the case she commented at a few forums in defense of Stacey, but made it clear she has absolutely no idea what was going on with Stacey around the time Emma died.(We've heard they were fighting) The other witness is Jennifer Goodnight, a supervisor over Amber and Stacey at Bank Of America.
Kelly Cromer said, " I want to state for the record the witnesses are seated with the Barker family...so Roberto Dager shoots back...."I want to note one is wearing Gray and one wearing black." Dager then told the court that he hasn't spoke to these witnesses yet and he wants to talk to them after the hearing is over. KC said she wanted to speak with them as well. This hearing is over....minus one expert, for sure...plus 2 defense witnesses? who knows...were they expected to testify to something today? and no trial date....yet.

The April 11 hearing was short and sweet in more ways than one. Short because it didn't take long, sweet because it was short, but more notably because Kelly Cromer and Roberto Dager were being nice to each other...

JZ calls the attorneys to the bench and they have a talk for about 10 minutes. After the attorneys returned to their tables, JZ calls "going on the record" and right away confirmed with both attorneys that the trial is going to be assigned to his courtroom and he would be the judge on the trial. Is that correct RD? Yes! Is that correct KC? Yes! Okay so we have established that it will be here. (Hmmm...can't tell you what that was about, whether there was an issue or if this is just procedure?)

JZ said  that the bus from the jail is having problems, so we have no inmates yet. Dager agreed to waive his client's right to be present. Zackey said "We'll come back on 4/13 to finish up on the motions, 402's and discovery. I want to start jury selection by the 18th adding, I think it will take a few days and a lot of jurors will be dismissed so I am ordering 60 to start with."

JZ  told RD to give the Massiah Motion (that you have written up) to KC today. KC said she will be in her office until 6 tonight, so if RD could get it to her before then it would be great, adding he tends to come in at 4:30 on the dot to give her things...JZ said you both know each others office numbers so you can get in touch by calling...RD said he would give her his cell # as well.( Several days were spent questioning witness and arguing the Massiah Motion. The only reason I can think of for giving it to the state now is that they agreed to some revisions. ??)

KC said that she still hadn't gotten some of the defense witness's statements so she will ask to exclude them at next hearing.

RD wanted to confirm the court would be ruling on his Change Of Venue, Media Exclusion and Massiah Motions at the next hearing..(The judge ruled against the COV motion earlier in the case, so the defense must have made another COV motion, but given the statements at the beginning of today's hearing that this case would stay it Zackey's court... it is confusing)

Judge Zackey said....so everyone is ready for trial? Mr.Dager? Yes. Ms.Cromer? Yes. Zackey replied, "OK, see you here on the 13th." This hearing was over

There was a lot of information covered in April 13 hearing. The state has 7 or 8 and the defense 38 motions (402) not including the defense Massiah Motion that the court needs to make rulings on.Many of the motions were to include or exclude photographs.
Some interesting information came out but it wasn't always clear which or whose motions the information was related to, so I'll just share the information and each sides stance as we understand it.

1)  It was disclosed that 2 people were identified by a witness at the Palmdale Park n Ride where Emma was first reported missing by Stacey Barker. The two 6 pack line up photos were introduced at the hearing on April 1 and clarified further today. Identified were Brendon Borelli (Stacey's boyfriend at the time Emma died) and Nick Barker (Stacey's brother). Before now, in our posts we have usually identified Brendon Borelli as just Brendon or BB, but now that his name is a part of the public record, if we use initials it's for convenience.

Nick Barker was positively identified, but the witness had trouble doing a 100 % ID of BB from the 6 pack line up alone....What this witness (female ParknRide security) said was that she saw Stacey Barker and a man pull into the PnR in the same vehicle. The witness said that soon after they arrived, she noticed the male was gone and a red car was leaving the lot. She was certain that the man who had arrived with Stacey was the same man who returned later with Nick Barker Brendon Borelli).

2) The State wants to use photos of Emma in the location her body was left/dumped, because they show the state of Rigor that Emma was in. KC said they go to show that SB had driven around with Emma dead in the car for HOURS. (ugh! use your imagination) The defense wants any and all pictures of Emma's dead body excluded. I'm not sure what the state's stance is on the autopsy photos, but I would be surprised if they didn't want at least a few in for the jury's eyes only. (Perhaps one of our intrepid court reporters can clarify.) The defense also wants a drawing excluded that allegedly depicts hand marks on Emma's nose and forehead.
UPDATE- The state is not requesting to use any autopsy photos! Thanks T!

3)Another defense motion attempts to exclude testimony from Detectives Nava and McCarthy about their interview / interrogation of Stacey Barker after she was released from the hospital on March 19, 2009. Dager just wants the state to use the audio tapes of the interview to present the evidence of Barker's statements to law enforcement. Cromer argued against that saying that the detectives could better convey Barker's demeanor to the jury and if Dager wants to use the tapes to try and impeach them, fine. The defense doesn't want barker's booking photo used at trial either.

4) Earlier in the case we heard mention of an incident in the holding area at the courthouse. We learned what this is all about....one of the officers allegedly called SB a BABY KILLER and RD objects to her being called names like that by law enforcement. KC said the incident was unsubstantiated. RD said it shows that all LE are against SB and that they are all trying to turn everyone against her, but he concedes he thinks if these deputies get on the stand that they will not confess to saying anything that would get them fired. KC says this has no relevance to Emma's death so doesn't belong in this case to begin with. KC did say if Barker wants to get on the stand maybe they can get it in.

5) Barker was treated by a SART (sexual abuse response team) at the hospital because she said that she had been raped, RD does not want repetitive statements from the Dr.s, Nurses and anyone else she talked to at the hospital...KC said it is relevant because SB claimed she was raped and did have moderate vaginal bruising....(personally I think RD might be right on this one, it should definitely come in that the "rape" was part of her "story" but unless she made incriminating statements they don't need to "elaborate" they know she wasn't raped. kat)

6)The defense wants a large number of pictures and hours of video admitted to show that SB was a loving mother  and how clean the house was and nice Emma's room was decorated . KC said it was a room in Stacey's parent's home and since the parents and other family members were with Emma more then SB, they may have had as much or more than SB to do with the design of  room and the up keep of the home and Emma's room.

7) RD wants evidence and testimony about a party the night before Emma's funeral excluded. Dager said the family had a dinner/get together the night before Emma's funeral...KC called it a party and wanted everyone to know that at this party they played BEER PONG. Dager said it was a just a get together, not a party and the younger people did play Beer Pong but not SB, he said...her Mom even played ...JZ looked amazed and said wait...Emma's Mom or SB's Mom? RD said SB's Mom.
 
8)The defense wants Barker un-cuffed and un-shackled in front of the jury. They should prevail on this motion because defendants are normally allowed to wear street clothes and are un-cuffed in front of a jury so the jury won't be prejudiced by the defendants appearance. I have seen shackles left on defendants with the tables for both parties skirted so the jury doesn't see the shackles but those have been cases of violent inmates.
Judge Zackey said that the 13th was a fact finding hearing and he still has to rule on the 402's and the Massiah Motion (related to witness x) on the 14th. JZ said he will even take the hearings into Friday if needed because he wants all this stuff done before 4/18, the day he is going to start jury selection and the trial will start once the Jury has been selected...on that day or the day after.....

Before the court went on the record for the April 14 hearing Kelly Cromer gave Roberto Dager a time-stamped copy of the police report from the security guard at the Palmdale Park n Ride. Tori mentioned it was obvious the attorneys were going to be nice to each other again today. Think they had a pep talk from the judge? We can only wonder.

Once on the record, Judge Zackey said that he had went through the 402's at home last night and reviewed the tapes of Detective Sandra Nava's interviews with Witness X and had made some rulings.

JZ ruled that before X went to law enforcement he was NOT a Government Agent, therefore he would be allowed to testify to what he and SB talked about before X contacted the Sheriff's office. At that time X was not infringing on Barker's rights, so there's no need to address Massiah for that. JZ added if the state is going to use any of the recordings made after X was in contact with, they will have to talk about this Massiah Motion again for that. KC said that she did not think she was going to use the tapes but she would listen to them and see if there was anything she wanted to use and let JZ and RD know so they could talk about it.


They talked about pictures again, 2 photo albums full, KC only wants some photos allowed, RD said they need to have both full albums to prove what a good Mother SB was to Emma, How in all the pictures that she was well dressed and matched in colors of clothing, blanket, socks etc....she was not just a kid in a teeshirt and diaper. KC said something about most people do dress their kids well for pictures. Then she talked about how the Barker's parents took care of Emma for the most part and her brother also took care of her for SB. Kelly Cromer told the court that Barker's mother had Emma in the day while SB worked and SB's father had her at night when she was out partying... 

(Stacey Barker's family were shaking there heads....as if to say NO we did not watch Emma...in early interviews Barker's father  had said the family adjusted their work schedules to be available to care for Emma. In defense of Stacey, Amber B. told some of us that if SB was out and they called her that Emma woke up, she would go home right away...so how can they say no they didn't watch her when SB was OUT...will they testify differently? That remains to be seen.)

Whew were almost done here folks. No one from our group was able to attend the hearing on Friday the 15th. Tori said her daughter was at the courthouse on Friday and checked in on Judge Zackey's courtroom during a break in the case she was attending, but the courtroom was locked. None of the local media reported anything on Saturday so we don't even know if there was a hearing Friday.

On Monday, April 18 Tori went to the courthouse to see if she could sit in on the Jury Voir Dire, but no one was in the courtroom. On Tuesday, Tori again went to Judge Zackey's courtroom and the calendar on the outside of the door was FULL but nothing for Stacey Barker was on the list...She said she saw RD but no KC,  so she went home and called someone she knows that would know the scoop. She was told that something like 70 Jurors had been asked for and 57 did come to the courtroom at about 10:30 they had gave the questionnaires to the potential jurors and told them to fill them out and come back on Thursday.  JZ is in downtown on Wednesday so his court is dark.
T's  friend said that they will start polling the Venires on Thursday, 4/21 and maybe go into Friday (no doubt, that is a lot of people) then if a panel is picked they will allow a couple of days for opening statements to be prepared by both sides. So...it looks like the trial could start as early as April 25th or as late as May 2nd....
We still don't know what most of Judge Zackey's rulings were or if he ruled on allowing cameras in the courtroom...I guess we will just have to wait for trial to find that out.

Here is the only media report we have came across so far about jury selection (Thanks LCM):

Jury selection starts in Palmdale child death

Sphere: Related Content

Stacy Barker Wants To Make A Deal......

As I'm writing, snuggled up in a blanket in front of the computer, I can hear the wind howling outside, bringing us our first Midwest snowstorm for the Winter of 2010/11. The forecast isn't for a big storm, but you never "really" know what the wind is going to 'blow in' until after it has blown. For anyone not familiar with Midwest Winter, the wind doesn't have to bring new snow to be devastating, the accumulation of snow drifts caused by the wind are often harder to overcome than fresh fallen snow. Even so, my mind isn't so much on the storm outside, but the "storm" that seems to be brewing  out in Lancaster, CA in the Stacey Barker murder case.

Stacey Barker, 25, is charged (2nd degree) with murdering  her 18 month old daughter Emma on March 18, 2009. She is also charged with one count each of (273ab.) assault on a child causing death and (273a). felony child abuse. Barker has pled not guilty to all of the charges.

 Even though this case is being played out in the CA high desert the storm outside seems relevant, because following a
criminal case reminds me of the uncertainty of watching a winter storm in progress....You can try to "forecast"  what the outcome of a criminal case might be (through the discovery and case law), but you never know for certain what the result will be until it's over. Much like the wind continuing to blow throughout a storm, the criminal investigation can continue until the case is settled either by trial or a plea bargain. The investigation may not uncover new evidence, but like the wind blowing that old snow (and possibly new) to make a drift, the accumulation of evidence that supports each other can be as damaging as a single admission. This scenario may well be what determines the outcome of the Stacey Barker murder case......it seems the defense may have realized they are stuck in a drift and are trying to dig themselves out.

if only.....

The hearing on December 3 was short. Once again, after confirming with both parties that they agree to stay in his court, Superior Court Judge Hayden Zackey allowed for another continuance. Judge Zackey said, " The next hearing will be on December 17..... adding....for what we were to do today ". Sorry, I can't tell you WHAT they were supposed to do today because recently much court business has been conducted in chambers .....kind of makes it hard to forecast anything.  A couple detectives (Nava was one) and a uniformed sheriff' deputy were in court today and were told to return on the 17th. A note of interest... we haven't seen or heard anything more about the defense experts that  required the trial to be delayed in September. What's up with that? Well anyway.....Zackey continued, " It's my understanding the parties are having an ongoing discussion regarding this case....we'll see if those discussions are fruitful on December 17th" adding, "Kelly will make a motion......you will make a motion, right?" Cromer agreed. If an agreement can't be reached and this goes to trial, January 7 will be a pre-trial hearing and Zackey said it will start 0 of 59.

The Saturday morning headline of the Antelope Valley Press (AVP) reads,"  Baby Barker's Mom Seeks Plea Deal!" Craig Currier of AVP reports that Deputy District Attorney (DDA) Kelly Cromer declined to comment about the specifics of the deal; however, she said she was approached before the hearing on December 3, by Stacy Barker's Public Defender, Roberto F. Dager, about the possibility of resolving this case without a trial.  Cromer also told the AVP the state has until December 17 to decide whether they will negotiate with the defendant's attorney or take this case to trial. If a plea agreement isn't reached, Cromer said this should go to trial in early February.

The state is under no obligation to accept a deal....word on the street is.....  the state has already turned down the defense offer.....we've also heard, but can't confirm, that Stacy Barker is willing to plead guilty to Involuntary Manslaughter and one of the 273 (we assume that is the felony child abuse charge 273a) in exchange for a twenty year sentence with 2 strikes and time served (subtract 20 months and don't forget good-time) . I only bring up the unconfirmed deal (consider it scuttlebutt) as a jumping off point to start a discussion....Do you think the state should negotiate or take this case to a jury? What type of deal do you think the state could make that would be justice in this case?

According to Wikipedia, "Plea bargains are so common in the Superior Courts of California that the Judicial Council of California has published an optional seven-page form (containing all mandatory advisement required by federal and state law) to help prosecutors and defense attorneys reduce such bargains into written plea agreements. Click here to see a PDF of the form, it's interesting.(Thanks LCM)


 This isn't the first discussion of a plea.Earlier this year, there was mention of an offer to settle and Deputy District Attorney Kelly Cromer was overheard saying in the courtroom, " The only deal I'll accept is 15 to life." Obviously, there wasn't a deal made. I wonder....was Dager just blowing smoke up DDA Cromer's skirt to see how strong of a case the state felt they had or was he just trying to see what color her panties were? LOL jk We will never know that answer for sure, but at the next hearing  DDA Kelly Cormer presented through the discovery process some CD's that consist of taped visits with civilians that went to see Barker in jail and some letters to and from another inmate at the jail....can you hear the whistling wind? I can and it's whistling "Erin Sutton". Whoooweoooo.....the wind can blow from all directions.

Did PD Dager forget to forecast a warning to his client........prisoners have no rights to privacy....or did she just not heed his warning? The content of the communication Barker has engaged in with her visitors or fellow inmates hasn't been made public, but I'd think it can't be good for the defense if the state intends to use it at trial. Is it a coincidence that a week or so after Erin Sutton proffered his testimony in camera Barker's visitor status changed to no visitors? What seems most telling is the defense making a plea offer following an order signed by Judge Zackey on November 17 to allow Dager and Barker a face to face visit with his laptop.
If the state has Barker on video or letters she has written making comments that are consistent with her admissions to law enforcement she may have undermined her own defense.

In my opinion, even though we've been aggravated and sometimes amused by Roberto Dager for things he has said and done in this case, such as, " There is no proof his client 'SUFFERCATED' her daughter " or when he argued his motion for a change of venue,” These dumb, stupid, idiotic, moronic people blog on things they don’t know or things they think they know in an effort to turn people or potential jurors against my client.”........he does seem to be providing Stacey Barker a vigorous defense. If the state decides to take this case to trial I'll write a post about possible defense strategies based on information we have learned during the pre-trial hearings and the motions filed so far.....in the meantime I'm going to put another log on the fire and call it a night......it's cold out there. Sphere: Related Content

Delays Push Stacey Barker's Murder Trial Into 2011

Emma Barker

In this entry I want to give an update on the pre-trial hearings of a murder trial that has been in the making since April 23, 2009 when Stacey Barker was arrested and charged for the death of her daughter, Emma Leigh Barker. After the update on the hearings and a little review, I want to take another look at the charges filed against Barker and what the California penal Code says about the elements of those charges that apply to this case.

Stacey Barker

For those who may not be familiar with the case, Emma Barker was 18 months old forever when her mother, Stacey Barker, led police to where she had disposed of Emma's lifeless body the day before, along side the Golden State Freeway in Sylmar, CA, . When Emma was first reported missing at about 11 pm on March 18, 2010, Stacey Barker claimed she had been attacked and knocked unconscious as she was loading Emma into the car after playtime at a Lancaster, CA Park. Barker claimed when she came to, Emma was gone, evidently taken by her attacker(s). Later Barker admitted she had made up the story of the attack and kidnapping, she said Emma had died accidentally and she feared being blamed so she dumped her daughter’s body, removed some clothing and injured herself to support her kidnapping claim.

On April 23, 2009, when Barker was arrested, nearly a month after Emma's death, the charges filed against the young mother included one count of Second-degree murder, one count of Assault on a Child Causing Death and one count of Child Abuse. The complaint alleges that Barker willfully caused and permitted the child to be injured and harmed and that injury resulted in death. Authorities have accused Barker of smothering her daughter. Stacey Barker pled not guilty to all counts on August 12, 2009. She has been held at the Century Regional Detention Facility on a one million dollar bond since her arrest.

Rather than give the "in the courtroom report" of the hearings, I'll just hit on some of the highlights; however,I still want to thank our friends from the AV for taking the time to attend the hearings and share with us what they see and hear. Your efforts are greatly appreciated by many who are trying to follow this case through the justice system.

For many, this murder case seems to be dragggging on.....(A July 26 trial date had been set but because the court was informed at a June 28th hearing that both sides and a witness(s) had a conflict with that schedule the judge agreed to another delay.) At the end of the June 28th hearing, as Judge Hayden Zackey set a new date for the trial to start, during the week of September 26, he was very clear that there would be no more delays.....

Judge Zackey addressed the lawyers for both sides," You both want it to stay in this court right?" They both said, "yes".  Zackey then said, "Alright then, there will be NO more delays unless I am in a trial, then you both agree to wait until I am finished to start the trial...the only delays will be from ME, agree?"  Both Deputy District Attorney (DDA) Kelly Cromer and Public Defender(PD) Roberto F. Dager said," Yes".

 

Well.....there have been more delays......no trial yet and we are almost half way through November, at this point we don't even have another tentative trial date. There have been several hearings since I wrote about the August 11 hearing in this case, yet there really isn't much to say beyond delay, delay, delay. ~sigh~

No doubt the judge's admonition when he set the trial for September was sincere, but Mr. Erin Sutton aka "Vampire" had just surfaced in an exchange of discovery on June 9 and the investigation was ongoing.....Sutton is an inmate who reportedly has had communication with Stacey Barker while they have been incarcerated. It wasn't until August 11 that Sutton appeared before the court "in camera" to answer questions. The  information from that hearing remains under seal for now. Undoubtedly more time has been needed to investigate Sutton's claims.

The hearing on August 26 was scheduled to wrap up discovery and hear some previously filed defense motions. Judge Zacky told the defense," All the other motions you want to file at that time will be heard", and then asked," You will be bringing in expert witnesses right?" - During the August 26 hearing we learned the defense needed more time for consulting an expert witness....which meant no September trial......just another hearing scheduled for September 15......

This is speculation, but because of the timing, it seems the proffer of Sutton's testimony in chambers on August 11 may have changed or shifted the strategy of the defense compelling the judge to grant another delay.....do they need a new expert to support a motion(s) to keep Sutton's testimony out, or rebut it in some way? It's possible the expert witness is for something unrelated to Sutton, there are other issues. Whatever the reason, it must be compelling for Judge Zackey to allow another continuance. I guess we'll have to wait for trial to find out.

The hearing on September 15- There was another Public Defender in court for the defense, because PD Dager had a family emergency. I don't know if the defense expert witness was there or not, but the judge said the hearing is rescheduled for October 8 and all witnesses are to come back on that date, adding with no explanation, the hearing will be held in camera (on the record with both parties but in judges chambers and under seal ). Sheriff's Homicide Detective Sandra Nava was at this hearing, accompanied by two men in suits, who appear to be LE.

Detective Nava testified during the preliminary hearing that when she questioned Stacey Barker, she changed her story several times blaming Emma's death on a variety of accidents in the back seat of her car on the freeway before "admitting" she had held her hand over Emma's mouth knowing that Emma had a baggy in her mouth. It seems likely this "admission" will be a focus of contention for both sides during trial. Will there be a video shown of LE questioning Barker, particularly if she was making admissions? At the Preliminary hearing Judge Carlos Chung didn't allow the tape to be played, citing length, but let Detective Nava testify to it before he ruled Stacey Barker would stand trial. Judge Chung didn't make a ruling about the admissibility of the video at trial and as far as we know Judge Zackey hasn't made any rulings. Was this an issue before the court during some of the recent meetings in camera as well? Sounds feasible.

October 8- "In Camera hearing" There was no explanation from the court for having the hearing in camera.

October 13- This was a short but contentious hearing.....DDA Cromer asked Judge Zackey if they could go in camera to discuss some problems she found with paperwork. After returning to the courtroom, Judge Z. announced that he found the state's request to be reasonable and that things need to redacted from records, such as witness information.
As the judge was speaking, Mr. Dager appeared to be furiously reading some papers, Ms.Cromer asked the judge, "Make him stop reading!". (Hmmm do you suppose he was trying to get a good look before the redaction was done?) The judge told Dager to go get his papers.  On Dager's way out of the courtroom he was overheard saying some very non-professional things about the DDA.....I won't go into it, but will say both sides have engaged in name calling.
 When Dager returned,  Judge Zackey said he has  the reports from both parties and they will be redacted per discovery rule 1054. Dager added he also wanted some redaction per 1054 in the first or second subpoena, adding he wants to interview everyone who has had contact with Barker since May (09 or 10 ?) Something was said about a government agent and Kelly Cromer said, "He's not a government agent!" (We know this refers to Erin Sutton, Dager announced in open court on June 28 that Sutton had identified himself as such to Barker.)
Discovery rule 1054 specifically requires that discovery be conducted informally between and among the parties before judicial enforcement is requested.....
Zackey says again he will redact and asks how long it would take them to read it? They agree to one week and made plans to return to court on the 20th. Zackey told the defense it wasn't necessary for the defendant to attend that hearing (exchange of paperwork). Court was recessed.

 The next court hearing is scheduled for December 3, 2010. Craig Currier reported in the Antelope Valley News(AVN) that the prosecution said the trial should begin within 45 days of that date. DDA Kelly Cromer told the AVN, "We're pretty much ready to go" adding, " The trial should begin in January." When asked if this was the last continuance, Cromer replied, "I'm hoping so."  I think a lot of people would agree with that hope. Cromer also told the AVN, when asked, she couldn't comment about the delays or the closed hearings.

I noticed on the LASD website that as of August 20th, Stacey Barker's visitor status has changed from a Y to a N. Does anyone think it's a coincidence her visitor status changed 9 days after her attorney questioned Erin Sutton / Vampire in the judges chamber? It came out  through discovery, that the state has some CD's consisting of taped visits with civilians that went to see Barker in jail and some letters to and from another inmate at the jail, Vampire. Have things been said during visits with others that could hurt the case? Why else shut off visits? Once again we'll have to wait for the trial, until then it appears inmate Barker won't be getting her twice weekly visits.

Because so much of the recent court business has been conducted in camera and there seems to be a number of motions and records that are sealed, there isn't a lot of court business to report. During this lull in the case it seems a good time to take a look at the California Penal Code and revisit the charges filed in this case.

 The California murder law

187.(a) Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being, or a
fetus, with malice aforethought.

Malice is "express" when there is clear evidence that
someone intended to kill another person.
Malice is "implied" when the person acted with a
reckless disregard for human life. And while there
are two degrees of murder…that is,
first-degree murder and second-degree murder… 
both require that the defendant
acted with malice.

189.  All murder which is perpetrated by means 
of a destructive device or explosive, a weapon of 
mass destruction, knowing use of ammunition 
designed primarily to penetrate metal 
or armor, poison, lying in wait, 
torture,or by any other kind of willful,
 deliberate, and premeditated killing, o
r which is committed in the perpetration of, 
or attempt to perpetrate, arson, rape, 
carjacking, robbery, burglary, mayhem,
 kidnapping, train wrecking, or any murder 
which is perpetrated by means of discharging
 a firearm from a motor vehicle, intentionally 
at another person outside of the vehicle 
with the intent to inflict death, 
is murder of the first degree.
All other kinds of murders are of the second degree.
Second-degree Murder
In cases where child endangerment leads to a
child's death and thus murder charges,
prosecutors generally charge it as a
second-degree murder. This is because
criminal negligence and lack of care
usually invoke implied malice rather
than an actual intent to kill.
Prosecutors can charge second-degree murder
charge in connection with child 
endangerment charges in one of two ways:


1)through the California felony-murder rule, 
or
(2) by demonstrating implied malice.

These are two separate "theories" upon which
prosecutors can base their second-degree
murder charges. This means that a jury can
convict a defendant of second-degree murder so long
as it agrees with either of these theories.
And, under certain circumstances, a jury may actually
agree with both theories.
Every person guilty of murder in the second degree
shall be punished by imprisonment in the state prison
for a term of 15 years to life.
There are longer terms possible for second-degree murder, 
but they don't apply in the Barker case.

 Assault on a Child Causing Death

273ab.  Any person who, having the care or custody
of a child who is under eight years of age,
assaults the child by means of force that
to a reasonable person would be likely
to produce great bodily injury,
resulting in the child's death, shall be
punished by imprisonment in the state
prison for 25 years to life.
Nothing in this section shall be
construed as affecting the applicability
of subdivision (a) of Section 187
or Section 189. 

Child Abuse







273a.(a) Any person who, under circumstances or 
conditions likely to produce great 
bodily harm or death, willfully causes
or permits any child to suffer, or inflicts 
thereon unjustifiable physical pain or mental 
suffering, or having the care or custody of any child,
willfully causes or permits the person or health
of that child to be injured, or willfully causes or 
permits that child to be placed in a situation 
where his or her person or health is endangered. 
 
A child abuse charge in CA is considered a "wobbler"
(can be charged as a misdemeanor or felony
 depending on the facts in the case) if prosecuted
as a misdemeanor shall be punished by 
imprisonment in a county jail not exceeding 
one year and a $6000 fine, if prosecuted
as a felony and there is a conviction the
penalty is  in the state prison for
two, four, or six years.
  
Sorry for the lapse in updates, my personal life called.
I love blogging, but this is a hobby so occasionally
I have to take a break. I am also not a lawyer, so I
interpret as best I can. I included the link to the
California Penal Code so anyone so inclined can look
for themselves. I found the penal code section
1054 - 1054.10 very interesting.  
 

Sphere: Related Content

Stacey Barker August 11 Hearing - Star Witness Doesn't Want To Play

Emma Leigh Barker

The murder case against Stacey Barker finally appears to be nearing the trial phase of the legal process. At a hearing held at  the Michael Antonovich Antelope Valley Courthouse in Lancaster, CA.on August 11,  Superior Court Judge Hayden Zackey said the court is still shooting for a trial the week of September 26, 2010.

 At a previous hearing Judge Zacky required the prosecution and the defense to agree if they want him to preside over this trial the only excuse for it not happening in September is if his schedule has a conflict.

Stacey Barker is a 25 year old woman from Lancaster, CA accused of suffocating her 18 month old daughter, Emma Leigh Barker, to death before dumping Emma's body in tall grass on the side of the freeway on March 18, 2009.

When Emma was first reported missing, Stacey Barker claimed Emma had been kidnapped. Barker claimed she had been knocked out by "the kidnapper" as she loaded her daughter into her car seat when they were leaving playtime at a local park. Barker claimed the next thing she knew she came to six hours later in her car, now parked several miles away in a Palmdale park and ride lot, partially unclothed, injured and her daughter was missing. Because Barker did have injuries consistent with a struggle she was transported to the hospital for treatment and an Amber Alert was issued for Emma.The next day Barker admitted making up the abduction story and led authorities to Emma's body. She said the little girl died accidentally, causing her to panic (afraid she would be blamed) and leave the girl's body near the freeway.

  
On April 27,2009, Barker was arrested and the charges filed against the young mother include murder, assault on a child causing death and child abuse. Stacey Barker formally entered a not guilty plea to all counts on August 12, 2009. She has since been held at the Century Regional Detention Facility in the city of Lynwood on $1 million bond
.
The purpose of this article is to share the details of the hearing on August 11. Once again, Tori, and friends have taken time out of their day to attend the hearing and share the details with us. ~ thank you ladies ~
The hearing got started early, around 9 a.m.. Deputy District Attorney Kelly Cromer was first in the courtroom today, followed by Public Defender Roberto Dager. When Judge Zackey came in, court got under way even though the defendant wasn't in the courtroom yet.

At the July 26 hearing, PD Dager had requested an inmate named Erin Sutton, who was communicating with defendant Barker, be brought into court to answer some questions. PD Dager told the court that Erin Sutton is or claims to be a GOVERNMENT AGENT! Judge Zacky asked, "Do you mean a government informant? Dager said," NO, on one of the taped conversations with my client he identifies himself as a Government Agent. An employee of the state." Dager wants him in court to answer questions about other cases he has testified in and so forth...under oath and the hearing was scheduled for August 11.

Erin Sutton

We overheard someone say something like "HE" is refusing to talk or that "HE" should refuse to talk...something along those lines, it was hard to hear.(.Apparently the "star witness" for the day didn't want any part of these proceedings.) Shortly after, the Bailiff informed the court, "He" is here" (in holding cell). Judge Zacky and the Bailiff exchanged a few words before the Judge called PD Dager, DDA Kelly Cromer and the Court Reporter with her steno machine to his chambers.
 (We speculate that Erin Sutton was brought into Judge's Chambers to answer Dager's questions in private. We were disappointed at not being able to hear Sutton's testimony; but, unless it is sealed we will find out eventually, especially if the state uses any of the communication between Sutton and Barker at trial.)

 I should add that  Mr. Dager told the court this information about Sutton, on the record, on July 26. While we normally report anything that is on the record, we felt we should wait to disclose this until after this hearing. If Erin Sutton has incriminating testimony against Ms. Barker, you can be sure the defense will try everything they can to discredit him. Frankly just the fact Sutton  is a convicted criminal gives the defense a leg up, especially if he is benefited for testifying.....that is....unless Barker was recorded saying or wrote something to incriminate herself

An Aunt of Stacey Barker commented at the Now Public forum., evidently in reply to our question, "Why would Stacey Barker associate herself with such a guy as Erin Sutton aka Vampire?"
This is a quote of one of her comments, "The answer to your question is Sutton was a plant by the DA on the bus.  The intent was to extract some sort of information regarding Emma's death.  He was convicted and sentenced to 26 years, for some sort of child molestation.  He was offered a deal (and was found guilty bgy[sic] his peers of his crime) to get a lesser sentence if he befriended Stacey.  So there you have it.  Let's talk about the DA making a deal like that to cover her week[sic] case on Stacey." She added this in another comment,"The DA has nothing on Stacey, that's why they offered a convicted person like Aaron to try and get evidence and it turns up nill[sic]!  But he gets 18 years off of his sentence??? There's justice at work."

 I supplied the link to her comments and our replies at the NP forum above, if you are interested. I do want to say that as far as we can find (Tori contacted the Superior Court phone line for inmate information) Erin Sutton is in jail for felony robbery not child molestation and he is not on any of the state sex offender registries that we could find. We don't know if Sutton is an "informant" or "government agent" but can pretty comfortably say it sounds far fetched to give someone an 18 year reduction in a 26 year sentence for "just trying" to solicit information. I don't know who gave them this information, we'll have to wait and see if it's correct or not. Granted, as family of the accused,  they are in a very frustrating position and we have no desire to argue with them. We have a right to follow this case, form our own opinions and share what we hear in court with you. What matters at the end of the day is what the jury of Stacey Barker's peers decide after they have heard the evidence that is allowed into court.

OK back to the hearing:

Dager, Cromer, the Judge and the Court Reporter came back,. Zacky said the next hearing will be on August 26  for wrap up of discovery. Judge Zackey then  instructed the Bailiff to bring Ms.Barker in please...
When SB came in today, she appeared to be in a snit, walking heavy and mad looking. She didn't look into the gallery at all, she plopped down into the chair next to PD Dager and faced forward.
Zacky advised Barker we are still shooting for the week of Sept 26th for trial. We'll  be back here August 26 to discuss the motions you want filed (or have filed ?) specifically mentioning some previously filed motions:

1) MOTION FOR CHANGE OF VENUE - This motion was filed on January 17. When Judge Zacky denied the motion for COV on February 18, he told the defense we have a large jury pool and we won't know until we poll the jurors if that is necessary. {Meaning  it was denied without prejudice, so it could be brought up again later. )

2) EXCLUSION OF MEDIA - After filing  the change of venue motion  on January 17, PD Dager informed the court if his motion for COV was denied,  he would ask that all media and news reporters and people in the gallery that report on this case on blogs be kept out of the courtroom.
Judge Z said he would have to do some research on this, because of the "Freedom Of Information Act", the community has the right to know what is going on.

Judge Zacky continued," ALL the other motions you want to file at that time will be heard", and then asked," You will be bringing in expert witnesses right?" The judge reminded both sides," We will finish up any discovery either side may have." adding, "Discovery is a ongoing thing."

DDA Cromer said, " Here are some more letters and phone calls" as she handed a giant yellow envelope to PD Dager, which he sort of  let  fall on the table hard, he didn't seem pleased with this new stuff.

Judge Zacky said, "OK, We will see you all back here on the 26th and court was recessed." Stacey Barker got up and escorted by the bailiff she marched off towards the holding cell as if she was mad, at the last second she tried to turn and mouth "I love you" but none of her intended recipients were looking at her, as her boyfriend and grandparents, who attend every hearing, had already left their seats and had their backs to her when she decided to acknowledge them....so no one saw her this time.

. Sphere: Related Content

Will There Be Justice For Emma Barker? UPDATED 4/30

UPDATE below Original Story-
                                                                                   

Emma Leigh Barker
September 2, 2007-March 18, 2009

 Emma Barker was just 18 months old when her mother, Stacey Barker, 25, led police to her little body on March 19, 2009 . Emma’s mother had dumped her body along side the Golden State Freeway in Sylmar, CA. 12 hours earlier.

When Emma was first reported missing Stacey Barker claimed she had been attacked and knocked unconscious, when she came to Emma was gone, evidently taken by her attacker(s). Later Barker admitted she had made up the story of the attack and kidnapping, she said Emma had died accidentally and she feared being blamed so she dumped her daughter’s body.

On April 27,2009, Barker was arrested and the charges filed against the young mother include murder, assault on a child causing death and child abuse. The complaint alleges that Barker willfully caused and permitted the child to be injured and harmed and that injury resulted in death. Barker pled not guilty to all counts on August 12, 2009. She has been held at the Century Regional Detention Facility on a one million dollar bond since her arrest.

For more details on this case click here.

There was supposed to be a hearing on Monday, April 12 in the Stacey Barker Murder Case. We had hoped to learn at this hearing if there would be a plea deal or if this case would be going to trial. There was not an actual hearing according to our friends Tori, Ange and TD who attended the “hearing“ and shared what happened in court with katfish….ponders, so that I could share with you. (Thank you friends!)

Public Defender Roberto F. Dager told the court that at 10 am, Stacey Barker was still en-route to the Michael Antonovich Antelope Valley Courthouse in Lancaster, CA. from the Century Regional Detention Facility in Lynwood. It's a 90 mile drive from the jail to the courthouse, one way. Dager told the court that when Barker arrived he wanted to see her for 5 minutes so she could sign some papers. Superior Court Judge Hayden Zackey set the next court date for Thursday, April 29, 2010.

PD Dager was overheard telling a few of Stacey Barker’s family, who had also came to the courthouse for the hearing, there was no use for them to stay because Stacey wouldn’t be seeing the judge today and after signing papers she would be on the bus right back to LA.

Our friends think it is pretty likely that Stacey Barker is accepting a plea deal and noted that Deputy District Attorney S. Kelly Cromer wasn’t present in the courtroom when this "hearing" took place. Had she and the Public Defender already discussed what needed to be discussed before the “hearing“? Hopefully we will find out more on April 29.…stay tuned.

Update- 4/30/2010
There was another short hearing held  4/29 in Lancaster, Ca in the Stacey Barker murder case.Just a few short notes from our friends who attend the hearings and share with us:

The defendant's bus was late again coming from the Central Regional Detention Center. While waiting for the defendant to appear, DDA Kelly Cromer and PD Roberto Dager had a "little side conference" in the jury box. Our friend said Dager said "something" to Cromer, to which Cromer was heard to laugh and say," The only deal I'll go for is 15 to Life." With that the discussion was over until the Barker was brought up to the courtroom. (keep in mind this was just part of a conversation that was over heard, so should be evaluated on that basis, not as fact pertaining to this case, just something you might have heard as well if sitting in the courtroom)

Something that was put on the record is Judge Hayden Zackey's desire to get a court date set in this case. PD Dager told the court he needs more time to interview more witnesses and there was still a question of some discovery. Judge  Zackey said," I would like to start TRIAL within the 60 days, this is getting OLD." Zackey added, "I understand the nature and gravity of the crime, but I would like to proceed with trial soon." (Tori's thinks the "this is getting old " statement was in reference to the defendant being brought to court, 90 miles one way, and nothing being accomplished.Given the financial crisis in CA that seems a reasonable assumption.) Another hearing date was set for June 7 and court was recessed.

Our friends noted that Stacey Barker was in GREAT spirits today. When she entered the courtroom she said hi to her boyfriend in a flirtatious manner, during the hearing she was bouncy and laughing with her attorney, and when she was led out of the courtroom by the bailiff (despite an admonition earlier in the case not to have make any contact with the gallery) she turned in a "coy" way and said "BYE" to her family...kind of like she was somewhere other than a court of law.....bidding farewell to her fans. ( LOL, whatever)

Check back, our friends will attend and give us an update of what happens in court on June 7. Hopefully there will be a trial date set so there can be some Justice for Emma.

In this writer's opinion, getting to the  Truth = Justice. Sphere: Related Content

Stacey Barker Dilemma...Will There Be A Plea Deal In March Or A Trial In April? UPDATED

UPDATE 3/22/2010 - There was no plea entered today and the case was continued until 4/12/2010. The Judge said the trial will be soon after.....so unless they reach a deal in the meantime this is going to trial, most likely in April.
Stay tuned

Emma Leigh Barker
There was another pre-trial hearing in the Stacey Barker murder case, on Monday, March 8, 2010, at the Michael Antonovich Antelope Valley Courthouse in Lancaster, CA. Stacey Barker 25, is accused of smothering her daughter, 18 month old Emma Leigh Barker on March 18, 2009.

Stacey Barker initially told police Emma was abducted from her car in the parking lot of a Lancaster, CA park as they prepared to leave after playing at the park. She claimed she was knocked out by the kidnapper and woke up six hours later, several miles away, at the Palmdale Park-n-Ride. Detectives said Barker had injuries consistent with a struggle, including bruises on her head and was taken to the hospital for treatment.

Authorities say Barker later admitted making up the abduction story and inflicting the wounds on herself. Twelve hours later, Barker led police to Emma’s body, dumped in a grassy lot near the Golden State Freeway in Sylmar, CA. Barker gave various statements to police as to how Emma died, ranging from an accident to an intentional suffocation. The one consistency to Barker's story was that she feared being blamed, causing her to panic and leave the girl's body near the freeway.

On April 27,2009, Barker was arrested and the charges filed against the young mother include murder, assault on a child causing death and child abuse. The complaint alleges that Barker willfully caused and permitted the child to be injured and harmed and that injury resulted in death. Barker formally entered a not guilty plea to all counts on August 12, 2009.

Friends of katfish ponders, who live in the AV, have been attending the hearings and any "in the courtroom" reports are based on information they have shared...so here we go..... Due to budget constraints the court had closed on Friday, so when they arrived at the courthouse early Monday morning there was a half hour wait in line, just to get into the courthouse.

Tori said that even though they made it to the courtroom about a quarter past eight (court doesn't usually start until nine) Stacey Barker's hearing was already under way. Tori couldn't get into the courtroom, but was able to watch from the ante chamber. Ange and TGT were able to get in, but the courtroom was standing room only. It seems court had already been on and off the record in Barker's hearing. When they arrived, Stacey was already sitting at the defense table and Judge Hayden Zackey was just taking his seat at the bench as he said ,"We will go back on the record". Zackey said that he consulted with the head Judge and he wants to try to keep the trial in his courtroom, but due to the cutbacks he does not know if that is going to happen, but emphasized again he would try. Zackey did say he would like the trial to begin by April 5, 2010. (Unfortunately we couldn't find out what happened before the girls got there, but it couldn't be much as the courthouse opens at eight.)

Public Defender Roberto Dager tells the court he wants to trail the hearing again until 3/22, adding that's 14 of 30. Judge Zackey said, "What is it you want to come back for on that date? I don't want to keep bringing Ms. Barker back and forth if I don't have to. " (Barker is housed at the Century Regional Detention Facility in Lynwood, it's a 90 mile drive from the jail to the court one way. Given the budget constraints it's a good idea to limit those trips.)

PD Dager and Deputy District Attorney S. Kelly Cromer huddled together talking and then Dager said "We are going to put an offer on the table." Zackey said, "Okay, we will come back on the 22nd, that will give the lead Deputy time to review it. If we go to trial, we can still start by April 5, that will give Ms. Cromer time to do her other case." Kelly Cromer said she expected that case to be resolved quickly. Dager asked his client's file not be sent down yet, adding he wanted her to stay there so they could talk. And that was it for now. This case appears to be advancing one way or the other.

For those of you from California, I came across this that might be of interest:

Important Court Closure Information

Due to the ongoing statewide financial crisis, and pursuant to state law enacted in 2009, Superior Courts throughout California will be closed Wednesday, March 17, 2010, and closed the third Wednesday of every month through June 16, 2010.

(For more information follow the important court closure link above the picture.)

Sphere: Related Content