Witnesses Testify in Corporal Injury Trial

Share:

by Novpreet Shoker

The case against Timothy D. Armstrong resumed today in Department 13 as two more witnesses were called to the stand to testify. Armstrong is charged with causing corporal injury on someone with whom he was in a relationship.

Deputy District Attorney David Robbins recalled a witness, the victim of the injuries allegedly inflicted by Armstrong. Deputy DA Robbins proceeded to show the witness pictures of the various injuries she had sustained in mid-September of 2016.

During cross-examination, Deputy Public Defender Martha Sequeira recounted the witness’ previous testimony.

After some time of having the witness acknowledge discrepancies between her past and present testimonies, Ms. Sequeira asked if the injuries might have been the result of her own actions, and not from Armstrong physically abusing her. The witness replied no.

Ms. Sequeira then asked if the injuries inflicted were a result of the rough sex she was having with Armstrong previous to that day. The witness replied no.

Finally, the defense asked the witness if she had “any independent recollection” of whether the injuries inflicted on her were from Armstrong attacking her or if they were the result of the witness trying to have sex with the defendant in the backseat of a vehicle.

The witness responded that she did not know.

Ms. Sequeira also brought to the witness’ attention that her medical records illustrated a different story. The medical records indicated that the witness’ injuries displayed various degrees of severity, and were even described as “superficial.”

The witness had no substantive response to that evidence.

During redirect, Mr. Robbins asked what type of fabric the backseat, that the witness and the defendant were in, was made of. The witness answered that the seats were made of cloth. Mr. Robbins then asked if the cloth backseats might have inflicted the injuries on the witness. The witness answered doubtfully.

With another cross, the defense asked the witness if they had fallen onto concrete as she previously testified, and how the concrete might have inflicted some of those injuries. The witness answered (they fell on) both grass and concrete.

Ms. Sequeira then asked the witness, “What is the truth?”

The witness restated that she fell onto both grass and concrete.

There was no redirect, and so Judge Paul K. Richardson dismissed the witness.

The defense then called the final witness of the day, Armstrong’s brother. He also added that he knew the witness who had testified before him, in that they went to high school together.

The defense asked the witness to recount the day of the incident. The witness began to describe how he was called during work and told that his brother, the defendant, was completely naked and drunk outside the complaining witness’ home, along with her, with whom he was involved at the time.

He then proceeded to come home to find the couple in his backyard yelling profanities, and acting in a disorderly manner. The female then told the brother that she was leaving Armstrong there, and that she was done with him.

Before she left, Armstrong’s brother asked why Armstrong was naked, to which the female answered that they had had sex earlier in the day and he was too drunk to get dressed again.

While the witness was trying to take care of his brother, the female complaining witness returned, saying she forgot some items. When Armstrong realized she had returned, he begged her to take him with her, despite their arguing and fighting all day. Although she was hesitant, she agreed, and so with the help of his brother, Armstrong got into the vehicle and left with the woman.

Ms. Sequeira then asked the defendant’s brother if he believed that the couple was intoxicated, to which he answered yes, both were drunk, but Armstrong was “stumbling, fall-down intoxicated.”

Ms. Sequeria also asked if there any obvious signs of injury on the witness, and Armstrong’s brother answered that he did not notice any injuries on her.

During cross-examination, Mr. Robbins asked Armstrong’s brother if the witness had told him of the abuse at a later time. Armstrong’s brother replied that she did call him throughout the day after the couple had left. She claimed that she was really done with Armstrong this time, and that he had physically assaulted her. She even described that Armstrong hit her on the back of her head as she was driving him to the brother’s house.

The defense had no redirect.

Judge Richardson then relieved the jury for the day. He informed the jury that the court will reconvene on June 6 for closing arguments by both counsel, and that they will begin deliberations toward the latter part of the day.



Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$
USD
Sign up for

Share:

About The Author

The Vanguard Court Watch operates in Yolo, Sacramento and Sacramento Counties with a mission to monitor and report on court cases. Anyone interested in interning at the Courthouse or volunteering to monitor cases should contact the Vanguard at info(at)davisvanguard(dot)org - please email info(at)davisvanguard(dot)org if you find inaccuracies in this report.

Related posts

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for