Testimony of Family Members Continues in Dorsey Case

By Julienne Correa and Mariel Barbadillo

In the morning of September 28, 2016, Judge Paul Richardson presided over the resumption of the trial of the People vs. Darnell Dorsey. In accordance with Penal Codes sections 273a and 273ab, Mr. Dorsey is charged with assaulting and inflicting deadly injury on his girlfriend’s 20-month-old son, Cameron Morrison. Michelle Serafin, Deputy District Attorney, is representing the prosecution. Deputy Public Defender Martha Sequeira began the cross-examination of the mother’s brother, “PC Jr.”

The day started off with Ms. Sequeira asking the witness to describe the interview he took part in at the District Attorney’s office. PC Jr. then described the state of the trailer (home of Cameron Morrison, his older half brother, his mother and Mr. Dorsey) when he went to clean it. He mentioned that the living room was trashed, with holes in the wall and the carpet. The state of the kitchen was a mess, as well. He said he opened the bedroom door and found a pile of clothes on top of the carpet, including a shirt, which he later brought to the police as evidence. The witness cleaned by putting trash in the bags and putting clothes in the dresser.

According to Ms. Sequeira, the Davis Police Department, upon taped initial entry, missed the shirt that the witness found, and examined the home by tearing holes, searching for more evidence. In another note, Ms. Sequeira questioned PC Jr.’s feelings towards Mr. Dorsey, and he answered by saying he was once angry at Mr. Dorsey, but not anymore.

PC Jr. struggled to remember talking to the Davis Police Department, saying, “I do not remember the Davis Police Department talking to me,” and “feeling I should not the meet the Davis Police Department.” He believed that the person who contacted him was part of the defense attorney’s office.

With Ms. Sequeira’s frustration due to the witness’ insufficient answers, the prosecution was given the floor. Deputy DA Michelle Serafin started by asking about the testimony the witness gave to police when bringing in the shirts for evidence. According to PC Jr., he did not remember taking two shirts and only remembered taking one. In addition, he barely recognized his own or his mom’s voice in the recording of the interview, and did not remember the conversation much. The shirt was a button up style, and he brought it in believing that it had something to do with the crime because of the stain. The prosecution asked if the witness was lying about finding clothing at the scene of the crime, and he said, “No ma’am.” PC Jr. mentioned that he found the shirt underneath the pile of clothes on a dark colored rug. However, his recollection was subjective and both prosecution and defense struggled to elicit useful answers. The morning recess break was then called.

After the break, Ms. Serafin asked the court if they could show photographs of where the witness may have found the shirt. However, the defense was adamant not to excuse any leading questions that may bring bias to the witness’ answers. PC Jr. said that the pile of clothes was in the middle of the bedroom belonging to Dorsey and the victim’s mother, between the bed and the wall. He pointed to the area and was then asked whether he “manipulated” the pile of clothes in any way, to which he answered, “No.”

The prosecution proceeded to another topic, asking if PC Jr. ever gave the kids a bath. The witness answered negatively, but mentioned that he found dark spots (on the boys), but no alarming bruises, scars or suspicious injury. Ms. Serafin then asked if the witness was lying to get something on Mr. Dorsey or if he had any animosity toward the defendant, to which the witness answered no. The defense then proceeded to ask questions. Ms. Sequeira took note of PC Jr.’s prior charge, six counts of first-degree burglary, and his being out on bail for a different felony. The witness responded, “I never went to jail more than once,” while Sequeira responded with, “Lying in a court is a crime,” as well as, “Planted and fixed evidence is a crime.”  The prosecution took over by questioning the witness regarding his previous crimes, then asking if he had changed in any way. PC Jr. responded by saying he was not hanging out with the same group and was working maintenance for his grandfather at their property. The defense closed the questioning of PC Jr. by asking him how other people convinced him to steal other people’s stuff, also implying that he was a “lying thief.”

The People then called in another witness, “EC,” at 10:25 am. She has been married to PC Sr. for four years and they have six kids altogether – three are her stepchildren (the previously testifying AC, PC Jr., and VR – mother of Cameron) and three are her biological children. She works as the property management at the same facility where PC Jr. works, being that it is a family business. She mentioned that VR lived with the family until she moved out, then four months later she returned with Cameron’s father, “M,” and lived at the trailer park. It was not clarified, but VR apparently continued living at the trailer park, then with Mr. Dorsey, father of her eldest son.

The prosecution then continued to question the witness about the property, in accordance with the diagram. EC explained her familiarity with the property and the accuracy of the photo taken during January of 2014. The witness mentioned that she saw VR’s children almost daily and she worked at the office down the street. However, she was mostly gone from the park during the day. VR would bring the kids to play and say hello, and would let them spend the night a few times. EC mentioned that the children were well behaved. However, the older child, “J,” did have allergies causing congestion. The victim, Cameron, did not have any known health problems. The boys fought with each other in a usual manner, as brothers do.

The prosecution then asked if EC ever saw any bruises or scars on the children, and she mentioned that the older brother had a broken arm while Cameron had a black eye. However, they did not have any more bruises or scrapes than an average child. Ms. Serafin asked about Cameron’s black eye during his older brother’s birthday party and then showed a photograph of Cameron from that day. The photograph depicted Cameron with his aunt, AC. EC then pointed to where the black eye was located, but she said that the injury was more apparent in person. She then explained that Cameron was happy, but upset at the party. He was crying when others would come into the bouncy house or went down the slide. The witness then indicated that this might be related to the broken ribs/other injuries. However, EC mentioned that Cameron’s mother, VR, could tell if he was hurting or not.

Ms. Serafin continued to question EC about the incident of Cameron on the front porch at Thanksgiving in 2013. The boys were playing on the porch, PC Sr. and Mr. Dorsey were greeting each other, and EC was at the door. To her surprise, she heard a loud scream and found that Cameron had fallen and scraped his face. However, there were no complaints of broken ribs after the fall. EC then proceeded to answer the questions about there being any other significant falls or accidents, to which she answered no.

On the Thursday prior to January 22, 2014, the boys slept over at EC and PC Sr.’s house, and EC mentioned that one of the boys had a runny nose. Cameron was happy and did not display any pain. Friday morning, the couple left town and did not come back until Sunday night. EC described not being able to see the boys because she was told that they were sick.

The prosecution then asked about VR and Mr. Dorsey’s life with the kids. She mentioned that VR worked full time while Dorsey cared for the children. On the night of the incident, her husband received a phone call from Cameron’s mother, VR, that they were at the hospital and Cameron wasn’t breathing. EC and PC Sr. then went to Sutter Davis Hospital. VR was of course already there, but EC could not recall any others who were also there. The prosecution then asked the witness about the location of her home.

At the hospital, EC checked the child’s status with VR, the nurse, and the doctor. The witness could not recall details and described the scene as filled with “fervent activity.” She then proceeded to mention that she took the older child, J, and noticed that he had a black eye. A picture from the hospital of the witness with J was then shown to the jury, indicating the area of the bruise. EC said that the child could not have inflicted the injury on himself because of his cast. The prosecution asked if the witness asked the child how the black eye came to be. EC believed that the child felt unsure, because he bowed his head down as if “he did something wrong.”

EC said that, in the hospital, there was an argument involving Mr. Dorsey, VR’s aunt, and PC Jr., but there was no physical altercation. However, the police officer and PC Sr. came in to quiet the fight. At the end of the night, EC and PC Sr. took the older child with them to the police department for further questioning, a short 30 minutes, then went home. Mr. Dorsey was arrested and the mother stayed at the hospital until Cameron was transferred to UCD Med Center in Sacramento. At this point in the testimony, the court took a lunch break.

Registered Nurse Shares Observations of Dorsey and Family in Emergency Room

By Mariel Barbadillo

After the lunch break, “EC” (wife of the victim’s grandfather, “PC Sr.”) returned to complete her testimony.

The prosecution asked EC about a conversation she had with Mr. Dorsey regarding his discipline of Cameron and the older boy, “J”. Specifically, Ms. Serafin asked if something happened that made EC tell Mr. Dorsey to not shake his children. EC said she had seen something about “shaken baby syndrome.”

Deputy Public Defender Joseph Gocke then cross-examined the witness. He began by stating that, in January 2014, Cameron was barely 20 months old and thus was unable to speak fully, communicating mainly through body language. He asked if Cameron ever exhibited body language that suggested he was fearful around Mr. Dorsey. EC answered in the negative.

The defense went on to ask about the night of January 22, 2014. EC’s husband, PC Sr., received a call from Cameron’s mother, “VR,” around midnight. Over the phone, EC heard VR yelling, “Help! Help! My son’s not breathing!” EC presumed the call occurred when Cameron and VR were in the ambulance on the way to Sutter Davis Hospital.

EC said she did not observe any issues of concern regarding Mr. Dorsey’s interactions with Cameron and J (Cameron’s older half-brother and Dorsey’s biological son). She confirmed that Mr. Dorsey had asked her questions about parenting in order to better care for his children.

On the topic of J’s persistent health issues, EC said she had insisted J get tested for allergies. Through the tests, the family discovered J was allergic to oak trees, which EC has in her backyard. Mr. Gocke asked if the witness observed puffiness or irritation in J’s eyes as a result of the allergy. She said she did not notice those symptoms, but that he would often cough.

The topic then shifted to J’s birthday party at the bounce house in West Sacramento. The defense asked about a statement EC gave regarding Cameron’s discomfort when she picked him up by his ribs, causing him to cry. Upon reading the police report to refresh her memory, she said it was a mistake and she did not make that statement.

Looking back, EC said she thinks Cameron’s ribs were injured.

During redirect examination, Ms. Serafin asked EC if losing her grandson was traumatic. EC confirmed this, and attributed her inability to remember specific conversations with police to the trauma.

When asked if she thought J’s black eye could have resulted from his oak allergy, EC answered, “Absolutely not.”

The prosecution’s next witness was “AF,” a registered nurse at Sutter Davis Hospital. She was a triage nurse the night of January 22, 2014, when Cameron arrived at the emergency room.

AF observed Emergency Medical Service (EMS) personnel administering cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) to Cameron as he was being brought into the hospital. She does not recall the CPR being done incorrectly.

The witness recalled Cameron’s mother arriving in the ambulance as well. AF described VR as “very upset,” crying loudly, pacing back and forth, and going to her knees at times.

The next person to arrive, according to AF’s recollection, was Cameron’s mother’s boyfriend (Mr. Dorsey). When asked if she saw that individual in the courtroom, she replied that she did not.

The witness said she saw the patient’s mother and her boyfriend sitting next to each other as they waited. From her memory of that night, she said she saw the boyfriend telling the mother not to be upset. He allegedly told her Cameron had respiratory problems, but assured her that Cameron was going to be fine.

The witness claimed the boyfriend did not show any emotion, describing him as having a “flat affect,” unlike Cameron’s other family members at the hospital that night.

Mr. Gocke began cross-examination by alluding to testimony from police officers, hospital personnel, and family members saying Mr. Dorsey was a “roller coaster of emotions” during the night in question. AF said those testimonies would differ from her own observations, at least for the time she was with Cameron’s family.

The defense then asked if, in her experience with other families, one family member might tamper down their own emotions to help other family members in emotional distress. AF said it is possible.

AF revealed that she gave her first statement for this case in August of 2016. Testifying about events that occurred approximately two and a half years ago, the witness acknowledged a person’s memory is much clearer when recalling events in the more recent past compared to years ago.

AF then disclosed that she is aware the patient’s mother’s boyfriend is being prosecuted for “shaken baby syndrome.”

During redirect examination, the witness said that, upon reviewing Cameron’s CT scans, the nurses and doctors at Sutter had a discussion about possible reasons for his injury. They supposed it was abusive head trauma, which would have been AF’s first experience with such a case.

When asked by the defense about the CPR Cameron received, the witness could not recall if she had performed CPR on Cameron herself. If she had, it would have been her first time performing CPR on a child as young as 20 months old.

The defense also questioned AF about her note of “respiratory distress” on Cameron’s chart. Mr. Gocke asked if it is possible Mr. Dorsey overheard that statement about Cameron’s respiratory problem and proceeded to tell VR about it. The witness said it is possible, but she has no recollection of other nurses or doctors saying Cameron had respiratory distress.

The trial is scheduled to resume on September 29, 2016.