Prosecutors have supplied an unflinching description of Rebecca Grossman.
Impaired by alcohol and Valium, they allege, she recklessly sped her Mercedes by way of a residential neighborhood, chasing her ex-Dodger boyfriend earlier than killing two younger boys in a crosswalk.
The query now’s whether or not jurors will imagine this portrayal of a killer or see one thing extra nuanced within the tragic occasions of that night in Westlake Village three years in the past.
Grossman’s protection has challenged many elements of the prosecution’s case, casting blame on her then-boyfriend, and insisting that she didn’t intend to harm anybody and was deeply remorseful in regards to the boys’ deaths.
The jury is being requested to find out whether or not Grossman is responsible of two counts of homicide, two counts of gross vehicular manslaughter and one depend of hit and run leading to dying. If convicted of all expenses, she faces 34 years to life in jail.
To safe a second-degree homicide conviction, prosecutors should show that Grossman acted with implied malice and knew that the act of driving at a excessive velocity in a residential space was harmful to human life.
However the jury might additionally choose lesser expenses, which might carry a considerably lighter sentence. Jurors will have the ability to take into account vehicular manslaughter with peculiar negligence in the event that they acquit her of these expenses involving gross negligence. The lesser type of vehicular manslaughter may end up in a 12 months in jail.
Or they might, as Grossman’s attorneys have argued, discover her not responsible.
Louis Shapiro, a Los Angeles protection legal professional not related to the case, stated the protection has an uphill battle — however, he famous, the seriousness of the costs filed by prosecutors additionally is a possible barrier to a conviction.
Rebecca Grossman, left, together with her daughter.
(Irfan Khan / Los Angeles Instances)
“Some jurors may discover it tough to render a homicide conviction merely for the truth that this isn’t the standard state of affairs the place one would count on homicide expenses to be introduced,” Shapiro stated. “They could really feel a manslaughter conviction is extra applicable, and such a disagreement amongst jurors might end in a hung jury.”
Jurors had been introduced with two very completely different variations of the Hidden Hills lady and the Sept. 29, 2020, incident that ended the lives of Mark and Jacob Iskander, ages 11 and eight, respectively.
“This was not a tragic accident,” Deputy Dist. Atty. Jamie Castro stated in Wednesday’s closing arguments. “This was homicide.”
However Grossman’s lead legal professional, Tony Buzbee, launched into his closing assertion with phrases he’d repeated all through the six-week trial: “The place is Scott Erickson?”
Prosecutors allege Grossman, 60, had cocktails with Erickson, a former Dodgers pitcher, after which raced with him — he in his black Mercedes sport utility car and she or he in her white Mercedes SUV — alongside Triunfo Canyon Highway till they reached a crosswalk, the place she fatally struck the Iskander brothers.
Grossman, Castro stated, confirmed acutely aware disregard for human life and knew her velocity may very well be harmful on a suburban road with pedestrian visitors as a result of she had been warned of the risks by police prior to now. Prosecutors even have alleged that Grossman traveled a 3rd of a mile after slamming into the kids earlier than security options in her automotive routinely shut it down.
“She had a historical past of rushing. She’d texted about it,” Castro stated. “She acted with disregard for human life.”
However Buzbee continued to level the finger at Erickson, who was the primary to barrel by way of the crosswalk. Crash reconstruction consultants for the protection have testified that Erickson’s Mercedes hit the boys first, sending Mark over his car and onto the hood of Grossman’s car.
Nancy Iskander and her husband Karim
(Mel Melcon/Los Angeles Instances)
“When you have doubt that the black automotive hit a type of kids, this case is over,” stated Buzbee, who informed jurors that Erickson allegedly lied to authorities in regards to the car he was driving. He stated it was a 2007 Mercedes SUV, however protection consultants testified based mostly on video a brief distance from the collision that it was a 2016 AMG Mercedes, which authorities by no means inspected.
Castro informed jurors that — though Erickson was reckless — there was “not a shred of proof” that he struck Mark or his brother: “He virtually hit them however didn’t hit them.”
It was round 7 p.m. on Sept. 29, 2020, when Nancy Iskander and her three sons approached the crosswalk. Carrying inline skates, Iskander started to cross Triunfo Canyon Highway at Saddle Mountain Drive. Her youngest son, Zachary, was subsequent to her on his scooter; Mark, on a skateboard, and Jacob, additionally sporting inline skates, had been additionally within the crosswalk.
“The mom did every little thing proper,” Castro stated. “Rebecca Grossman did every little thing unsuitable.”
Iskander beforehand testified that she heard revving engines and regarded as much as see a black SUV rushing towards the intersection. She dove out of the best way, pulling Zachary to security.
However she testified {that a} white Mercedes SUV was following carefully behind the black car. When it went by way of the crosswalk, Iskander stated, she heard an influence, and her two oldest boys had been gone.
Jacob was discovered close to the curb about 50 toes from the crosswalk. He was taken to a hospital, the place he was pronounced useless just a few hours later. Mark’s physique was discovered 254 toes away.
Grossman is accused of reaching 81 mph earlier than evenly braking and hitting the brothers at 73 mph, based mostly on the automotive’s knowledge recorder and the space Mark was discovered from the crosswalk. However Buzbee referred to as in consultants who testified that the information weren’t dependable and that Grossman was touring at 52 mph based mostly on a video captured seconds after the collision.
Even after the influence, Castro stated, Grossman “continued to drive so far as her automotive would let her.”
The prosecutor pushed again on the protection concept that Erickson struck the brothers first, saying the front-end harm to Grossman’s car was not “the results of a toddler touchdown on the hood.”
Castro reminded jurors that pathologist Matthew Miller, who carried out the post-mortem, testified that the boys’ accidents had been according to a single car hitting them. Buzbee countered that Miller, in what he thought-about the strongest indication of affordable doubt, acknowledged the “risk” that they might have been hit by multiple automotive.
Buzbee centered on flaws within the investigation, presenting a visible on the TV monitor with an L.A. County sheriff’s badge and the phrases “novice hour.” He stated investigators misplaced 5 of eight items of proof from the crash scene and didn’t communicate to Erickson. He stated investigators ignored different vehicles on surveillance video and centered on Grossman: “That they had a busted-up automotive, and the blinders had been on.”
“That is an accident,” Buzbee insisted, saying the medical expert had termed it as such, and never a murder.
Castro conceded there have been shortcomings within the investigation by the L.A. County Sheriff’s Division — with proof lacking and few photographs of the scene. However in the course of the trial, a former California Freeway Patrol officer turned crash professional was capable of re-create the scene.
The deputy district legal professional additionally repudiated testimony from Grossman’s daughter, Alexis, who informed jurors Friday that she noticed Erickson hiding behind a tree close to the place her mom was detained and that he later angrily burst into her household’s house in Westlake Village. She stated he smelled of alcohol and threatened to “damage” her and her household if she informed anybody she noticed him.
“Alexis is a sufferer of her mom’s manipulation,” Castro stated, noting {that a} deputy on the scene testified he by no means noticed Erickson and that nobody there reported his presence.
Buzbee stood behind the 19-year-old’s testimony, asking jurors, “Why did [Erickson] lie? Why did he make threats?”
Castro pressured eyewitness testimony in her closing argument. She reminded jurors that one witness, Susan Manners, testified that she noticed Grossman’s car hit Mark. Yasamin Eftekhari and Jake Sands, who had been driving in a automotive behind Grossman’s Mercedes, testified that they noticed the white automotive hit Jacob. Eftekhari, Castro famous, testified the black automotive by no means hit the boys.
Shapiro on Thursday described the protection as spirited however doubtlessly flawed.
“The protection is arguing that there’s affordable doubt as as to whether Grossman really struck and killed the youngsters,” he stated. “The issue with that argument is that there have been two eyewitnesses who testified that Grossman’s automotive struck the kids and the placement of the harm on Grossman’s automotive was in entrance of her automotive — according to the car hitting the kids.”
However Lara Yeretsian, one other L.A. protection legal professional, stated “placing one other suspect to the sword could muddy up the waters sufficient to get an acquittal or a hung jury.”
“Keep in mind,” she stated, “the prosecution has to ascertain causation past an affordable doubt. If the proof is just not clear as to causation, then that’s affordable doubt.”
