The police developed their theory of the crime — what happened the night Daniel Sanchez was murdered — and worked backward to find evidence they never found, murder defendant Rudy Quinata’s lawyer, Peter Santos, told jurors in closing arguments today.
“This, ladies and gentlemen, is how innocent people end up in prison,” Mr. Santos said. “You especially don’t want innocent people being imprisoned and you really don’t want the real actual killer out on the loose. I submit to you ladies and gentlemen that there are killers out on Guam because of this very problem at GPD.”
Mr. Santos also repeatedly called Quinata’s girlfriend, Joyner Sked, a “psycho,” who had the motive to kill Sanchez. Another jury in February convicted Ms. Sked of murdering Mr. Sanchez.
Read the first part of Mr. Santos’s closing argument below (a full report will be presented later today):
Ladies and Gentlemen, Gi Fine’nina yahu bai sangåni hamyu na hu sen agradesi hamyu guini na batkåda. Gof annok na un sen atituyi i man ma tågu’ hamyu guini gi esti na kaosa. Ya yahu lokkui’ bai gågao hamyu dispensasion kuntiempu sa’ bai hu åpmam guini na påtti, ti parehu yan gi duråntin i man ma’pus na biåhi annai gusi’ ha’ yu man kuestiona i taotao siha ni man tistigu.
First of all, I’d like to tell you all that I greatly appreciate this group. It was very obvious that you have followed everything you were instructed to do in this case. I would like to also ask for your forgiveness in advance because I am going to take long in this part, unlike during the trial when I was quick and brief with my questioning of the people testifying.
So now ladies and gentlemen,
You all better pray that you don’t get accused of a crime on Guam. Because according to Detective Eric Mondia, they develop a theory and then look for evidence to support it. Remember that I had to ask him twice about this. When I told one of my colleagues about what Detective Mondia said, he spit out his coffee and said that’s Bass Ackwards. My colleague is right. You must collect evidence and then develop your theory. This is why I asked Detective Mondia if they used case studies. Because if you use the method Detective Mondia described you get what is called “Tunnel Vision.” When you have tunnel vision, you miss all the critical evidence and clues because you only have selective hearing and vision. You actually ignore or discount evidence that goes against your initial theory. You heard Detective Mondia, he never changes his theory. There is overwhelming evidence of tunnel vision in this case.
This ladies and gentlemen is how innocent people end up in prison. When police judge a book by its cover and then develop a theory not based on any evidence, and then go looking for reasons to support their theory. This is the type of case study that they teach you about in those homicide investigation courses. Because at the end of the day, you
want to get it right. You especially don’t want innocent people being imprisoned and you really don’t want the real actual killer out on the loose. I submit to you ladies and gentlemen that there are killers out on Guam because of this very problem at GPD.
When I used to go to autopsies with the forensic pathologist I would bring all my theories and all the information to the pathologist. Why? Because it’s in the autopsy room that I want the forensic pathologist to confirm my theory or tell me I am totally off. I have even gone back to the forensic pathologist after an autopsy if I find out more information. He is there and accessible. That’s what he gets paid for. It’s not a waste of resources. You DO NOT WANT to go to trial and have the forensic pathologist hearing for the first time, the police theory of the case WHILE HE’S ON THE STAND TESTIFYING. Why? Because you get what you got in this case. The Forensic Pathologist is an extremely smart and intelligent guy. But you saw for yourself, he was trying to make excuses for the police. They put him in that awkward position. He said more information is always better than less information. Attorney Rapadas asked him what information would he not want to know. He couldn’t think of anything. Because there is no information that should ever be withheld form the Forensic Pathologist. So why then do police withhold information? Because of the tunnel vision. They don’t want to be proven wrong. They don’t want anything in their investigation that would go against their preconceived theory of the case. Because if they do, then they have to write it down and they have to give it to the defense. But a diligent defense attorney will spot and point out the discrepancies and deficiencies in their theory and investigation, so they say things like it’s a funding issue, I wasn’t assigned that task, it’s a waste of resources. Now I am not saying that EVERY SINGLE STONE must be turned over, that’s an impossibility. But you should and must turn over the important stones. So why then do important stones not get turned over? Because they don’t want to know what’s underneath. If you don’t want to know the answer to something, you don’t ask the question. For instance, even if a person thinks his or her spouse is
cheating on them, some people won’t ask. They’ll try to ignore the clues. Why? Because they want to live in their perception that they are not being cheated on. They want so bad to believe in that their spouse is not cheating on them. This is the same as GPD’s tunnel vision in this case. They want so bad to believe that they are not wrong.
This ladies and gentlemen is a disservice to the People of Guam and most of all a disservice to the Families of the victims.
My heart goes out to the family of the late Mayor Daniel Sanchez. Their father died a tragic and horrible death, and they deserve to know the truth. But the police fell far short of looking for and finding the truth.
I am sure you all know the children’s story, one of Aesop’s Fables, “The Boy Who Cried Wolf.” This case is the Opposite of the Boy who cried wolf. In the children’s story, the little shepherd boy was bored so he decided to play a prank and he yelled and screamed that there was a wolf and all the village people ran to rescue him with garden tools and anything that could be used to fight off the wolf. When they got there and found out it was actually a prank the village people got upset. The shepherd boy did it again a few days later and it got the people more upset. Then one day, an actual wolf did show up and so the shepherd boy yelled and screamed, but the people didn’t listen. We are all familiar with the fable. It tells us we should never cry wolf because when there really is a wolf, no one will believe us and no one will come to help us.
In this case, it was the opposite. When Rudy screamed for help that he was afraid Joyner was going to kill him, no one listened. He screamed for help multiple times, yet no one listened. Because they couldn’t believe that Rudy as big as he is, 6 foot 5 and 250 pounds, was afraid of a 5 foot 2 female. Then one day, Joyner did kill. But the person she killed wasn’t Rudy, it was Daniel. Rudy, who had been an abuse victim of Joyner was under her manipulation and control. He panicked and ran away. Joy had his phone and threw it away. She’s younger and knows how phones work. She probably knew it could be tracked.
Rudy was tired, wanted to go home – was probably asleep. Rudy is 60 years old. What reason, what motive does he have to harm Daniel Sanchez? He has a young daughter that he loves. He stepped up to be a father figure to Joyner’s son.
What reason or motive does Joyner have? She’s 30 years old. She’s a pyscho. She abandoned her 4 children. It is very common knowledge what a psycho is. It is someone who lacks empathy, someone who lacks feelings for others. Someone who is intelligent and manipulative and only thinks of and cares for themselves. A person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent behavior, an unstable and aggressive person.
Do we have any evidence of Rudy being a psycho? No, quite the opposite. Do we have evidence of Joyner being a psycho? Absolutely and totally.
Common Sense = Common Denominator = Uncommon Denominator Indictment vs. Preliminary Hearing. Article 32 hearing in the military. Guam never uses it.
Being falsely accused of rape. I was at IPTM.You will be instructed on Mr. Quinata’s decision not to testify. Lenny Rapadas is a very seasoned and experienced attorney, former Attorney General of Guam, Former U.S. Attorney (federal) Guam and CNMI. GPD and AG’s office had PLENTY of opportunity to talk to Rudy. Rudy has no obligation to go to the police. No obligation to report a crime. The first time Rudy tells his story SHOULD NOT be on the stand at trial facing a very well experienced attorney in front of a jury who have the power to convict him. He’s a high school drop-out, very uneven match. The family of victims deserve the truth and this is not how it’s supposed to work. The Government failed miserably in this case.
