[Editor’s note: the case went to the Jury last Friday, February 14. As of the end of the day Wednesday, February 19, 2014, they had not returned a verdict.]
The defense team presented its closing arguments in the highly controversial trial involving West Sacramento ex-officer Sergio Alvarez.
Defense attorney J. Toney claimed that the sexual relationships between Alvarez and the alleged victims were purely consensual while simultaneously attacking the credibility of the five alleged victims.
“These women are drug addicts,” said Toney.
He pursued this statement even further, stating that Alvarez’s alleged victims abused illegal substances to the point that their testimonies lost credibility.
The trial, lasting for nearly three weeks, has steadily revealed the previously unknown history of each alleged victim. Opening statements from both sides had already given the jury details of the alleged victim’s previous drug problems and street habits. All five alleged victims are believed to be actively participating in prostitution or to have been engaged in some form of lewd activity in the past.
Toney then attacked the idea that ex-officer Alvarez allegedly kidnapped and raped the women. He focused on K.R., the fourth alleged victim to testify during the trial, and claimed that her relationship with Alvarez was purely consensual. Toney called K.R. a prostitute because she gave Alvarez her number and stated that she had asked him to place her in handcuffs before giving him permission to commit sexual acts with her.
“[She’s] obviously not a victim; she’s turned on by Alvarez. She’s an addict.”
The third alleged victim called to testify, initialed K.N., was also stated to have very little credibility compared to Alvarez. Toney labeled her as “bipolar,” and as an “intoxicated woman with no memory.” He said there was simply no evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that she had been kidnapped, let alone raped.
Furthermore, Toney shot down the credibility of the first and second alleged victims, initialed R.G. and T.G. respectively, due to the extreme similarity of their testimonies. He claimed that their friendship gave them incentive to conspire against Alvarez and that even their testimonies before the jury was farfetched.
Toney recalled from a previous Criminal Scene Investigation testimony that there was no evidence of Alvarez’s D.N.A. on T.G.’s sweatshirt. There was also no lipstick on his shirt, which indicated that Alvarez and T.G. had not made any physical contact, contrary to her previous testimony.
Lastly, Toney stated that the main reason the alleged victims were willing to accuse ex-officer Alvarez on these charges was for money. He concluded that the alleged victims’ uncontrollable substance abuse and history of prostitution gave them every reason to pursue the case in order to obtain civil compensation through the court.
The defense rested its case and the jury was given permission to start deliberation.
[For closing arguments by the prosecution see: Closing Arguments in West Sac Police Sexual Assault Case]