Pag.8

HEATHER CHRISTENSEN-REEVES, having been called as a witness by the People, under Evidence Code Section 402, was examined and testified as follows:

DIRECT EXAMINATION

BY MR. ROMERO:

Q Ms. Reeves, I believe you testified previously that after going back to Monterey and helping your mother move up to Monterey with you, you went back to Oklahoma, correct?

Let me --that was a bad question.

At some point, when you helped your mother move to Monterey, your mother stopped staying with you, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And some point after that, you went to Oklahoma, correct?

A. Yes. Q And I think I'm confusing the issue.

When you were --at some point, you went to Oklahoma when you flew to LAX, correct?

A. Prior to, yes. Q And you flew into LAX to help your mother?

A. Yes.

Q Now, before you flew to LAX to help your mother, did you have a conversation with her by phone?

A. Yes.

Q Was that conversation about an incident that happened between her and Mr. Parlanti?

A. Yes.

Q And what did your mother tell you had happened between her and Mr. Parlanti?

A. Basically, she said that he had, uhm, he had beaten her and tied her up and basically kept her captive for a couple of days.

Q Do you recall her making any statements to you about sexual assault?

A. At some point, she did. I don't remember if it was during that conversation.

Q If it was not that conversation, do you have an idea of what conversation it might have been?

A. It would have been when I picked her up in L.A. --

or when she picked me up, rather. Q From the airport?

A. Correct.

Q Did your mother initially tell you that she was injured somehow other than by Mr. Parlanti?

A. Yes. Q What did she initially tell you?

A. She told me she fell down the stairs.

Q Do you recall when that conversation took place? Where she told you she fell down the stairs?

A. Before I went to Oklahoma. Q While you were in Monterey?

A. Correct.

Q And do you recall the conversation -- what day the conversation you had between you and your mother where you agreed to fly to LAX, what day that happened?

A. No, I don't remember the exact date. Q Do you remember approximately when it happened?

A. It would have been --I want to say it was three to

four days before I flew into L.A. Q Okay. To the best of your recollection?

A. Correct. MR. ROMERO: No further questions, your Honor. THE COURT: Cross-examination. MR. BAMIEH: Just briefly.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. BAMIEH: Q Hello, ma'am.

A. Hi.

Q Just a couple things. You said that the first --a conversation where your mom told you she had been tied up and beaten by Mr. Parlanti, you remember that statement being made?

A. Yes. Q And that was when you were in Oklahoma?

A. Yes.

Q To the best of your memory now, it's your belief that she mentioned the rape when you arrived back from Oklahoma to LAX?

A. Correct.

Q And that was a day you helped your mother move, correct?

A. Yes. Q So, that was some time in mid July, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And mid July dates, to the best of your memory, would be what? What would be the --what would you -- did you give me a range by what you meant by mid July?

A. July 12th to the 17th.

Q So you believe you returned from Oklahoma on the 17th?

A. Approximate.

Q Okay. If I told you there's a police report indicating sheriff's officers went to the apartment, Mr. Parlanti's apartment with your mother, on the 19th, would you think I'm totally wrong or was I close?

MR. ROMERO: Objection. THE COURT: Grounds. MR. ROMERO: Withdraw the objection, your Honor.

A. That would be approximate, yes.

Q (By Mr. Romero) So, would it be fair to say, when we say mid July, we are talking 7/12 to 7/19?

A. That would be fair, yes.

Q Would it be fair to go to the 20th or that's too much?

A. I think that might be pushing it.

Q Okay. And you believe that you received the phone call from your mother when she told you she had been battered -- we will call it the "battery phone call" -- you believe you received that three to four days prior to your arrival at LAX --

A. Approximately. Q -- to help her move?

Okay. And you believe that prior to you leaving for Oklahoma, you received a phone call from your mother in Monterey when she told you she had fallen down some stairs?

A. Yes.

Q And so, the dates of that phone call would be approximately from early part of July?

A. Uhm-hum. Q You said you were in Oklahoma on the 4th?

A. No. I was in Monterey on the 4th. Q I'm sorry. You were in Oklahoma on the 4th?

A. No. I was in Monterey on the 4th. Q Of July?

A. Yes.

Q Okay. So, did you --when you received that phone call where your mother told you she fell down the stairs, approximately what date was that?

A. It would have been any time before --any time after the point that we returned back to Monterey until we left for Oklahoma.

Q And so, did you leave for Oklahoma right after the 4th?

A. A couple of days after, I think. Q So --

A. This was three years ago. I'm not sure on the dates. Q That's fine. As long as you let us know what you are not sure on, we are okay with that.

Could I --could you have left for Oklahoma as late as the 8th?

A. I'm not for sure. Q Is it possible as late as the 8th?

A. I don't know. MR. BAMIEH: Okay. Thank you. THE COURT: Is that all?

MR. BAMIEH: From me, yes.

THE COURT: Redirect.

MR. ROMERO: No, your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

Thank you for testifying, Ms. Christenson-Reeves. I'll see you back here in the courtroom at 1:30.

While the witness is making her way out of the courtroom, Mr. Romero, you've gone into certain areas and some details with the witness. What are you going to ask the witness when asking her to testify concerning the fresh complaints?

MR. ROMERO: I'm going to ask her about the two, possibly three conversations she had with her mother; the first one that she had where her mother told her she fell down the stairs; the second one where she testified she spoke to her mother on the phone when she was in Oklahoma, and her mother told her she was beaten by the defendant, and I believe she said she might have told her, at that point, that she was raped or she told her that when she got to the airport, in LAX, that she was raped.

I can't go into -- for purposes of fresh complaint, under those specific statements, I can only ask her: Did your mother make a statement to you about the defendant physically and sexually assaulting her? Yes. And when was this made? And that's it.

THE COURT: Any objection to that?

MR. BAMIEH: Yes.

THE COURT: Ground.

MR. BAMIEH: I believe in order to be --in order to go on the fresh complaint, we are saying there's some relevance to it. This is a statement she made prior to reporting it to the police. Therefore, it showed kind of -- helps explain the delayed reporting that she did not --that she told people about it. But this witness, it was my understanding from testimony, first of all, that she's not sure as to the times at all. Very vague. She -- my understanding of her testimony was that she remembers specifically that her mom told her she was battered before she came back from Oklahoma, but she doesn't remember the rape until she arrived here.

We know that the rape conversation on the 19th was after she reported to the police because it was reported to the police, and I think Mr. Romero will agree with us, on the 18th. The second time it was reported to the police, but not before the interview. The second time the police interviewed her was on the 19th. So, in terms of that conversation at LAX, that's not a fresh complaint. That's not a fresh complaint. May be a slightly stale complaint under the law, but it's not a fresh complaint.

THE COURT: Where do I find the cases that define "slightly stale complaint"?

MR. BAMIEH: People versus Ron-just-made-it-up.

(Laughter.)

THE COURT: Usually, it's People versus Superior Court.

MR. BAMIEH: However, the fresh complaint cases, they all talk about complaints made prior to reporting to the police.

THE COURT: Mr. Romero, what about that?

MR. ROMERO: Your Honor, I think in my brief I cited case law that indicated the fresh complaint areas -- if you look at the time, but it --it's not like a spontaneous statement where it has to be made or an utterance at or near the time of the event.

The fresh complaint -- the purpose of the fresh complaint is that a woman, who is sexually assaulted, although they may not report it to the police at all or late, as we have in this case, over two weeks later, that when something like that happens to a woman, that she is going to make a complaint about it to someone. And in this case, Ms. White initially told friends and family that she fell down the stairs. And after she had some time to come to terms with what happened, she then told her friends and family that the defendant had beat and sexually assaulted her.

And the purpose for allowing the fresh complaint is to deal with the issue that the jurors might have: That if this woman was sexually assaulted and raped, why didn't she tell the close friends and her family, although she may have not reported to the police? A reasonable person would make such a complaint. I think the law doesn't make a distinction between reporting it the day of the incident, a week later, two weeks later, a month later.

THE COURT: I'm satisfied the statements fall within the fresh complaint exception, not really exception, but inadmissible for the non-hearsay purpose of showing a fresh complaint was made. At this point, I don't think there is anything magic about reporting to the police. I think a fresh

complaint can postdate that.

I have a bit of concern about the level of detail that you've asked the witness about. In your brief, you said what you are going to go into with these witnesses or what you want to go into with the fresh complaint witnesses is, quote, the fact that the complaint was made, the identity of the perpetrator and the circumstances surrounding the complaint.

What you just told me, you want to introduce that the victim told her daughter that she was beaten, tied up, kept captive for a couple days, and later was sexually assaulted.

I think that goes beyond what can be admitted into the fresh complaint doctrine, don't you?

MR. ROMERO: I think it does, and I think I'm limited to identity and the fact a complaint was made. I included the circumstances surrounding under the theory that it doesn't hurt to ask. And if the Court limits it, the Court limits it. I will direct my witnesses to only answer what they can.

THE COURT: Well, I'm satisfied that this is an admissible fresh complaint evidence. The only heartburn I've got is whether the level of details being offered exceed what's admissible, but if both parties want it in, that's fine with me.

MR. BAMIEH: I want to have a better understanding of how Mr. Romero plans on asking the question, I guess, to avoid the level of detail that the Court has indicated it would exclude. So, that's --that's my concern because this is one of those bells that I'm stuck with if it rings that I have to question

on.

THE COURT: I'm not going to try to case with you, gentlemen. I think it's admissible, and I'll re-read them over the break, but we will talk about this again before we take it up. I think it's admissible for the witnesses to testify that her mother told her about the complaint, who was the perpetrator, and the general nature of what she said. In other words, that there had been some assault by the defendant she was complaining about, but the details of it I don't think come in under the fresh complaint doctrine.

MR. BAMIEH: Okay.

THE COURT: And I think that tends to cut both ways here because you heard the witness say that the first complaint was as to battery only or the battery events only, and it was later, in another conversation, that she mentioned the sexual aspect of the assault. And whether that's an artifact of the witness' memory or the way it played out, I don't know, but that's what this witness has to say.

MR. BAMIEH: And based on that, the Court would then tell the jury that the statements Ms. White may or may not have made to her daughter are not being offered for the truth?

THE COURT: Well, I haven't been given a proposed limiting instruction. I'm open to giving one. I prefer not to wing it on something like that.

MR. BAMIEH: I will sketch one out at lunch.

THE COURT: I would appreciate that, but I... I think that's all you can go into is generally what the nature of the complaint was, but not the details about being beaten, tied

up, so forth. I think that becomes hearsay.

MR. ROMERO: At this point, I would agree. I think if -- it might be able to come in from a prior statement after cross-examination by Mr. Bamieh, depending on what he does to try and challenge the credibility of the charged victim. I just don't want --I just --I see the statements that Ms. White made to her daughter and other witnesses can possibly come in for other reasons besides the fresh complaint.

THE COURT: Well, the witness has been here. She's been on the stand. She's been examined. So, her testimony in the 402 hearing might be admissible in the trial, I don't know, but I don't think that was the purpose for which we were taking the testimony. The defendant may not have cross-examined her as extensively as he might have otherwise done as we are trying to preserve her testimony in some way because she's going back home on Saturday.

MR. ROMERO: I understand.

THE COURT: So, if you are seeking to introduce this for some broader purpose other than the bare bones outline that comes in as fresh complaint, I think you need to let the defense and me know that now.

MR. ROMERO: At some point, I don't think I can.

THE COURT: Then if you're prepared to produce the witness later in the trial so she can be cross-examined because that's the only way I can see it coming in. I haven't heard from Mr. Bamieh, yet, but his cross-examination of what the witness had to say was very brief.

67

And do you have more questions to ask her if her statements are being offered for the truth?

MR. BAMIEH: Yeah. Well, there's issues that I'm choosing not to go into right now because, obviously, I want to limit it to the theory of cross being: If the damage is minimal, the cross is minimal.

THE COURT: This is a 402 hearing.

MR. BAMIEH: Right. And a damage at a 402 hearing and how the Court would --the 402 hearing was for a fresh complaint, not for the truth. It's a big difference to me, so...

THE COURT: That's why I raised the point because, Mr. Romero, you seem to be suggesting what the witness had to say can come in for its truth later on, but I don't think she's going to be testifying about details in front of the jury. And if you are seeking to introduce her 402 hearing testimony, then I see a cross-examination issue because I'm not sure the defendant has fully cross-examined her -- has fully examined this witness as he otherwise might. And that gets to be a confrontation problem, so...

MR. ROMERO: Well --

THE COURT: We are doing all this to try to accommodate the witness' school schedule. She has exams next week and has to get back to Oklahoma. I understand that.

MR. ROMERO: I'll think about it over the lunch hour. I think we have gone into enough of the lunch hour for the court staff.

THE COURT: They are tough. They can take it. All

right. See you at 1:30. Let's make it 1:25, at least for you folks and me, so we can all make sure we are on the same frequency concerning where we are going with this.

(Off record -- lunch recess.) --oOo--

/// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// ///

VENTURA, CALIFORNIA; FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2005

P.M. SESSION--oOo--

THE BAILIFF: Remain seated. Come to order please. Court is again in session.

THE COURT: Counsel, before we get started, would you approach the bench, please. ///

(Bench conference held off the record.) ///

THE COURT: All right. Thank you. We are back on the record in the matter of People versus Parlanti. We have all jurors, both counsel, the defendant.

You can resume your cross-examination, Mr. Bamieh.

MR. BAMIEH: Yes. I need to approach of the witness, please.

THE COURT: You may.

MR. BAMIEH: Mr. Romero, I'm showing you...

CONTINUED CROSS-EXAMINATION

BY MR. BAMIEH: Q I'm just going to go through a series of pictures with you, Ms. White. Showing you what's been marked as People's No. 4, is that a picture of you at the police station on the 18th?

A. Yes.

Q I'm showing you what's marked --let me see if I can... okay. That's the way you appeared at the police station on July 18th of '02, correct?

A. Yes. MR. BAMIEH: Moving 4, your Honor? THE COURT: Any objection to 4? MR. ROMERO: No objection. THE COURT: People's 4 is received. MR. BAMIEH: May I publish it to the jury, your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. Just hand it to the bailiff. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Showing you --I'm going to show

you these in unison, Exhibits 3 and -- Exhibit 2, Exhibit 3.

Would you agree with me, ma'am, it's a picture of your face and then body shot of you with your head cut off in the picture?

Would you agree with me?

A. Yes.

Q That's the way you were at the police station on that day?

A. Yes.

Q Exhibit 3 is also pictures. I think it's of your back and your rib area and of your arm and with you pointing to it; four pictures, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And these accurately depict the way you looked at the police station on July 18th of '02?

A. Correct.

MR. BAMIEH: Moving, your Honor, People's 2, which is the four-shot exhibit, and People's 3, which is the two-shot exhibit.

THE COURT: Any objection? MR. ROMERO: No objection, your Honor. THE COURT: They are received. MR. BAMIEH: Offer to publish, please. THE CLERK: Is that 2 and 3? THE COURT: Yes, 3 and 3. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Showing you People's 6, ma'am, is

that a picture that you --of you pointing to your left wrist area? left arm area?

A. Yes.

Q Okay. And that's the inside portion of the left arm area?

A. Yes.

Q That accurately depicts the way your arm looked on July 18th of '02?

A. You can't see the bruising in the picture, but yes. MR. BAMIEH: Okay. Moving 6, your Honor? MR. ROMERO: No objection. THE COURT: 6 is received. MR. BAMIEH: Sorry. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) And these are 8 and 9. 8 would be

-- People's 8 would be a picture of your back area that day at the police station on the 18th, ma'am?

A. Yes. Q Shows you what your back looked like that day,

correct?

A. Yes.

Q 9 would be, I guess, your back and side area, correct?

A. Yes.

Q That shows the way your back and side area looked on that day, correct?

A. Yes.

Q Moving --and the day I'm speaking of is July 18th of '02, correct?

A. Yes. MR. BAMIEH: Okay. Moving 8 and 9, your Honor, into

evidence? MR. ROMERO: No objection. THE COURT: They're received. MR. BAMIEH: Offer to publish once again. THE COURT: That's fine. MR. BAMIEH: Thank you. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ma'am, we talked before the break

about the fax you sent to Detective Reilly. Do you remember that conversation, ma'am?

A. Yes.

Q And that's the fax you agree now you sent on July 22, '02 to Detective Reilly, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And it's a fax where you asked Detective Reilly to go arrest Mr. Parlanti, correct?

A. Yes.

Q A few weeks after that, ma'am, you didn't want Mr. Parlanti to get caught, did you?

Let me ask --may I rephrase the question, please?

A few weeks after that, you had --your --you did not --you felt like you did not want Mr. Parlanti to get caught anymore; is that true?

You know what? Bad questions two times in a row. Let me try one more time.

After you wrote that fax to Detective Reilly, eventually, you changed your mind, and you did not want Mr. Parlanti caught by the police, correct?

A. I never changed my mind. Q Ma'am, do you know who Brian Whitney is?

A. Yes, I do.

Q Is Mr. Whitney is a friend of Mr. Parlanti; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you e-mailed, on occasion, Mr. Whitney; isn't that true?

A. Yes.

Q And when you e-mailed -- after this incident, you e-mailed him; isn't that also true?

A. Yes.

Q And when you e-mailed him, do you remember e-mailing him an e-mail --e-mailing him on August 30th of '02 and saying to Mr. Whitney, "They filed charges on Carlo. Tell him to run"?

A. I don't remember that e-mail, no.

Q Do you remember writing an e-mail to Mr. Whitney, while we are on that topic, about describing what happened to you -- what Mr. Parlanti did to you?

A. Yes.

Q And you also wrote a Dr. Barbara Farber; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you also, in that e-mail, described what Mr. Parlanti did to you; is that correct?

A. Your speech is too fast. Back up. Q Thank you. Let me try that again.

Do you also remember writing a letter to a Dr. Barbara Farber describing what Mr. Parlanti did to you?

A. Yes.

Q And you wrote that after you left the state of California, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you also wrote a similar type thing to Mr. Whitney via e-mail; is that true?

A. I believe so, yes. Q Now, just so we are clear -- let me go back one step.

To Mr. Whitney, you e-mailed him several times, did you not?

A. Maybe two, three times, yes.

Q And so we are clear, uhm, you just testified that you --you don't remember e-mailing Mr. Whitney an e-mail where you said, "I just found out today what they charged

Carlo with. Tell him to run"? MR. ROMERO: Objection. Misstates the testimony. THE COURT: Sustained. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ma'am, do you ever remember writing

an e-mail to Mr. Whitney where you said, "I just found out today what they charged Carlo with. Tell him to run"?

A. No, I don't remember sending that. MR. BAMIEH: May I approach, your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. MR. BAMIEH: I'm approaching with D, Defense D. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ma'am, isn't it true that you're

looking at Defense D, correct?

A. Yes. THE COURT: Sorry. Can you back up? I was having a word with the clerk. MR. BAMIEH: Sorry. I asked her if she was looking at

Defense D. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. BAMIEH: And she answered, I believe, "yes." Is that

correct, Ms. White? THE WITNESS: Yes. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ms. White, Defense D, it says "From

Becca White" on the top; is that not correct?

A. Yes. Q That's your e-mail address, is it not?

A. Yes.

Q And it's dated, that e-mail, dated Friday August 30, 2002, is it not?

A. Yes. Q And it's to Brian@SystemCHCORP.com, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And that's an e-mail from you to Mr. Whitney; isn't that correct?

A. It appears so, yes.

Q And the e-mail reads, does it not, "I just found out today what they charged Carlo with. Tell him to run"? And there's a number of explanation points after that?

A. Yes. Q And you sign it "Becca," correct?

A. Yes. MR. BAMIEH: Your Honor, I move D. THE COURT: Any objection to D? MR. ROMERO: No objection, your Honor. THE COURT: D is received. MR. BAMIEH: Offer to publish. THE COURT: Any objection? MR. ROMERO: No objection. THE COURT: That's fine. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Now, at the preliminary hearing,

ma'am, on August 25th, of '05, do you remember me asking you questions about that e-mail?

A. I don't recall you asking me questions about that, no.

Q Do you remember me asking you --do you remember it being your desire that Mr. Parlanti, I believe, would not be caught by the police?

Do you remember me asking those types of questions?

A. I believe so, yes.

Q And do you remember responding that you wanted Mr. Parlanti caught?

A. Yes.

Q And I asked you -- do you remember me asking you: There's no way you would ever intend to warn him to run away; that the police were after him?

A. I'm sorry. You are really talking too fast. You

need to really slow down or I can't understand you. Q Okay. Let me try again.

A. Please.

Q Do you remember me asking you this question at the preliminary hearing: There's no way you would ever intend to warn him, referring to Mr. Parlanti, to run away; that the police were after him?

And you answered, no, you would never do that?

A. Correct.

Q Now, you knew Mr. Whitney to be a good friend of Mr. Parlanti, did you not?

A. Yes.

Q You knew Mr. Whitney to be collaborating with Mr. Parlanti on a computer project of some kind?

A. Yes. Q Was --do you remember what the name of that was?

A. OBDC, I believe. Q Do you know what that was? MR. ROMERO: Objection. Relevancy. 352.

THE COURT: Relevance?

MR. BAMIEH: It goes towards the witness' earlier statements, how she did not want anything regarding this case; to impeach that, your Honor.

THE COURT: I'll need more detail and offer of proof. I'll take that at the bench. ///

(Bench conference held off the record.)

/// THE COURT: The objection's withdrawn? MR. ROMERO: The objection is withdrawn, your Honor. THE COURT: Rephrase the question or have it reread. MR. BAMIEH: I'll try again. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ms. White, I asked you a question

about -- please correct me if I'm saying this wrong, but it's OBC Face? Is that what it's called?

A. I believe so, yes. Q Okay. And what is your understanding of that?

A. I don't know what you are asking. Q What do you understand that to be?

A. A company that Carlo created. Q Okay. And that Mr. Whitney was helping him with?

A. He has a partnership. Q And when Mr. Parlanti was in America, he was attempting to sell something related to that company? MR. ROMERO: Objection. Calls for speculation. Lacks

foundation. THE COURT: Sustained on the second ground.

Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ma'am, you understood that when Mr. Parlanti --you knew when Mr. Parlanti was in America that he was attempting to sell products related to that company with Mr. Whitney, correct?

MR. ROMERO: Objection. Lacks foundation.

THE COURT: Sustained. It's just the same question framed a different way. You have to first establish the knowledge on the part of the witness.

Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ma'am, did you have any knowledge about what Mr. Parlanti was attempting to do with that company?

A. I know what it did. Is that what you're asking me?

Q Let's start with that. What did it do?

A. He used it at work. Q Do you know for what?

A. To... it was part of an Excel program.

Q Were you aware or did you know that he was selling this program to people?

A. Yes.

Q And isn't it true after Mr. Parlanti left the country, you asked Mr. Whitney if you could sell the program to people?

A. That's --I don't believe that's exactly what I asked him, but similar, yes.

Q Okay. When you say "similar," what do you mean by that?

A. There was someone that was interested in it, and I

asked him if I sent him the information, if I could make $100 off the sale.

Q Off the sale?

A. Uhm-hum. Q Is that a "yes"?

A. Yes.

Q And you were also interested in selling it to other people; isn't that true?

A. If they were interested, yes.

Q Now, when Mr. Parlanti was in America, did you ever make that offer to Mr. Whitney?

A. I've never been asked about the program before.

Q Just so we are clear on my question, had you ever, when Mr. Parlanti was in America, when he was still in America, did you ever make that offer to Mr. Whitney that you would sell this program on his behalf?

A. I never had a reason to, sir. Q Is that a "no," ma'am?

A. No.

Q Ma'am, going back to the date of when you allege this incident occurred between Mr. Parlanti and yourself on that day, now, that morning, do you remember that morning or that day?

A. Of June the 29th?

Q If that's the day. Do you remember the morning of that day?

A. Yes. Q That morning, was your daughter there first thing in

the morning?

Did she spend the night or did they arrive that day? that morning?

A. They arrived that morning. Q If you remember, approximately what time?

A. I don't remember what time.

Q And if you --you spent the day with them, all day long?

A. In the apartment, yes. Q You guys didn't go any place?

A. Not that I remember, no.

Q And what time period are we talking? How many hours are we talking?

A. Six or seven hours.

Q And is that including, like, for instance, the lunch hour?

A. I believe so, yes.

Q And they leave some time in the late afternoon; is that fair?

A. Around 3:00.

Q At that time they were with you, that six or seven hours they were with you, were you and Mr. Parlanti getting

During that six, seven hours that they were there, was Mr. Parlanti drinking anything?

A. Alcohol, no.

Q So, at that point, after they left and you said approximately 3 p.m.?

A. Yes. Q Could it have been 4:00?

A. Yes. Yes.

Q What's the --what's the range, approximately, it could have been in the time they left?

A. It would have been no later than 4:00.

Q All right. At no later than 4:00, after that they left, did you and Mr. Parlanti do anything together?

A. We bought groceries. Q You guys went together to buy groceries?

A. Yes. We always did on Saturday.

Q Were you getting along when you went and bought groceries?

A. I'm sorry?

Q Were you getting along when you went and bought groceries?

A. Yes.

Q And I guess, as part of that grocery shopping, did you buy the two-liter bottle of wine?

A. Yes. Q And how long did it take you to go grocery shopping?

A. At the most, an hour. It usually didn't take very long.

Q And then when you returned home, that's approximately dinner time?

A. Yes. Q Is that fair?

A. Yes.

Q When you returned home at dinner time, at that point, we are talking between around five o'clock in the afternoon, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And between, let's say, 5:00 and we will say 6:30, seven o'clock, was that when you guys were having dinner or making dinner?

A. I was cooking, yes.

Q And then you guys actually cooked it. I take it you ate dinner with Mr. Parlanti?

A. Yes. Q Were you getting along during that period of time?

A. No. Q You guys were starting to argue?

A. We were bickering, yes. Q Now -- and he was drinking the wine, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And this bickering now went between, approximately, is it between 5:00 and 7:00 or 6:00 and 8 p.m.?

A. Yes.

Q And then did you notice that Mr. Parlanti went back and did some work? Or did you still stay with him?

A. We were --we generally stayed in the --the office.

We didn't go anywhere else. Q So you stayed with him?

A. Yes.

Q Until he asked you to go get the second bottle of wine?

A. Yes.

Q Okay. When you stayed in the office together, were you still bickering or was he working on something?

A. Both.

Q What were you working on? watching TV? reading something?

A. I was sitting beside him like I always did. Q Doing nothing?

A. Right.

Q Okay. So, then you went and you bought the wine, correct?

A. Yes. Q And then you came back?

A. Yes. Q And that's when everything went crazy?

A. Yes. Q Okay. When did you write in your diary, ma'am?

A. On the 29th? Q Yeah.

A. When I went to bed.

Q So, when you went to bed, before you went to sleep, you wrote in the diary?

A. Yes.

Q Okay. And you never -- after you wrote in the diary, you never went back and added to that?

A. No.

Q Now, when you talked to the police on the 18th of July of '02, did you ever tell him you had a diary?

A. I don't believe there was a reason to.

Q On the 19th of July of '02, did you ever tell the police on that date you had a diary?

A. No. Q The diaries, there's two of them, correct?

A. Yes. Q And the two diaries, you said one was your diary?

A. Yes. Q Did anybody tell you to write in that diary?

A. No. Q Is this something you've done your whole life?

A. Yes. I have several. Q Excuse me?

A. Yes. I have several. Q Several diaries?

A. Yes. Q And it's something you do daily?

A. Yes, off and on.

Q Now, the second diary, that's a diary somebody told you to write, correct?

A. Sorry. Ask me again.

Q Sure. The second diary, the second diary -- you said there's two diaries?

A. Yes. Q There's -- one diary is your personal diary?

A. Yes. Q Describe for me what the second diary is.

A. It's the one that one of the four attorneys told me

to keep for Carlo. Q Which attorney?

A. Bill. Q Landruth?

A. No. Davis. Q Bill Davis. Where is Bill Davis from?

A. Northern California.

Q And you had a conversation with him where Mr. Davis asked you to keep a diary on Carlo Parlanti, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And what was your understanding of what the purpose of that diary was?

A. To be presented at Ms. Hollingsworth's hearing. Q At some kind of judicial hearing?

A. Yes.

Q Well, at this time -- and when I say "this time" -- late June, early July '02, Mr. Parlanti was suing a Sandra Hollingsworth; is that correct?

A. Yes. Q And you were aware of that lawsuit?

A. I was helping him, yes.

Q And you were aware of the allegations that Ms. Hollingsworth made against Mr. Parlanti, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you were also aware of the allegation Mr. Parlanti was making against Ms. Hollingsworth, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you were also aware -- or you were assisting Mr. Parlanti in his interactions with his lawyers, correct?

A. I'm sorry. I lost you on the last two sentences.

Q You were assisting Mr. Parlanti in --in working with his lawyers, true?

A. Yes. Q Now, so, they wanted to use the second diary -- we

will call that the "Carlo Parlanti diary." Is that okay with you?

A. That's fine.

Q They wanted you to write a diary on Carlo Parlanti so they could use it at the trial involving Ms. Hollingsworth?

A. I'm sorry. Ask me one more time. I'm getting

tired.

Q That's all right.

THE COURT: Let me ask, ma'am, are you able to continue? Do you need a break?

THE WITNESS: I could use a five-minute, break, sir, please.

THE COURT: All right. We will take a five-minute recess then. We will resume examination after that time. Folks, between now and the time you come back to court, please don't discuss the case or form or express opinions. ///

(Off record -- recess.)

///

THE COURT: Back on the record now in the People versus Parlanti. We have all jurors, both counsel, the defendant and the witness.

Mr. Bamieh, you can resume your cross-examination.

CONTINUED CROSS EXAMINATION

BY MR. BAMIEH:

Q Ma'am, let's talk to you, once again, about the diary we are calling the Carlo Parlanti diary.

On that diary, would you handle it the same way you would handle the other diary? Meaning, everyday you would write something in it?

A. Yes.

Q And you would do that normally at the end of the day; is that correct?

A. Generally, yes.

Q And this was the diary, once again, that you were intending to give and present to some court; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you were hoping that the diary would help Mr. Parlanti in this case; is that correct?

A. That was the point of keeping it, yes.

Q And when you were keeping it, did you understand that potentially, you could be called to testify about what

you wrote in the diary, isn't that true?

A. Yes.

Q And so, it was important to keep it accurate and truthful, wasn't it?

A. Yes. MR. BAMIEH: May I approach, your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. MR. BAMIEH: Mr. Romero, approaching with what's been

marked as E, which is the last... okay? MR. ROMERO: Uhm-hum. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Approaching with two exhibits; 27,

People's 27. Would you agree with me that's the Carlo Parlanti diary?

A. Yes.

Q And that diary, on the 29th of June, you made an entry, correct?

A. Yes. Q And that entry, could you please read that for me?

A. "Carlo is touchy, and I cannot read him. He drinks." MR. ROMERO: Your Honor, I'm going to object. It calls

for hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. MR. BAMIEH: I'm not offering it for --well, may we

approach, your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. ///

(Bench conference held off the record.) /// THE COURT: All right. Thank you, counsel. Let's proceed.

Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ms. White, isn't it --you wrote -- you testified on the Carlo Parlanti diary, in relation to that, that you kept it much the same way you kept your personal diary, right?

A. I'm sorry. What do you mean?

Q In your personal diary, you said you made entries at the end of day?

A. Most of the time, yes.

Q In this diary, you said you did the same thing; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q And at the end of the day, you would write in what happened during that day; you would document it for the court in the Parlanti diary, correct?

A. Yes. Q And that was your intention to do it?

A. Yes.

Q On the 29th, ma'am, in the Carlo Parlanti diary, you never wrote that there was any physical violence, did you?

A. At the end of the 29th, when I went to bed, I

thought that was the end of the day. Q So, this is your entry right before you went to bed?

A. Yeah. Q When you testified on direct examination about this

day, you said you came home, and Carlo told you to go to the bedroom?

A. To get away from him.

Q To get away from him. And you thought that meant to go to sleep?

A. Hum. Q Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q And you said you went to the bedroom, and you changed your clothes?

A. Yes.

Q You put on a camisole, you said, and pajamas, correct?

A. And boy shorts, yes.

Q And you said just a few minutes later, Mr. Parlanti came in the bedroom enraged.

A. I wrote in the diaries before he came in there.

Q Okay. So, in both diaries, you made both these entries in the few minutes before he came back into the bedroom?

A. Yes.

Q Okay. And on this day, at the end of your day, you wrote --you wrote no -- nothing about any violence or anything about any sexual assault; is that correct?

A. Because at that time, there wasn't any.

Q Ma'am, isn't it true, on this day, June 29th, in your entry, you wrote nothing about domestic violence or sexual assault?

A. Because before I went to bed, there wasn't any. Q Did you write it in there, ma'am?

A. (Indicating).

Q How about on the 1st? Did you make an entry -- on the 30th, I mean?

A. I was asleep. Q Well, look on the --turn the page, ma'am, please. On the 30th, isn't it true you wrote, "Carlo worked

all day. We did not talk"? Isn't that what you wrote, ma'am?

A. If I'm keeping this -- MR. BAMIEH: Objection. Nonresponsive. THE COURT: Sustained. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Isn't that what you wrote, ma'am?

A. Yes. Q You made an entry on the 1st of July, did you not?

A. Yes. Q Didn't you write, "Carlo just worked"? MR. ROMERO: Objection. Calls for hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Did you write anything about

physical violence on the 1st?

A. No.

Q Matter of --you testified, on direct examination, that on the 30th, you slept all day; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q And then you testified, on direct examination, on the 1st, you slept all day; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q Now, uhm, the entries on Mr. Parlanti's diary, you said on the 30th, he watched you during the day, the next day; is that true?

A. Yes. Q And that he was in and out all day of your bedroom?

A. Yes.

Q And your entry on the 1st, July 1st, you said on your direct testimony that Mr. Parlanti also kept a close eye on you that day?

A. Yes.

Q And on the 1st of July here in your entry, you put, "Carlo just worked on his computer."

A. Yes.

Q And on the 30th and the 1st, when you wrote in your diary, you didn't write anything about anything that happened with any violence, did you?

A. No.

Q And this was --you were keeping this journal for court, correct?

A. Yes.

Q So, on the 2nd of --and --did you inform Mr. Parlanti that you were keeping a journal on him for court?

A. Yes. He knew I was. Q He did?

A. Yes. Q And that's because you told him?

A. Uhm... Bill told him.

MR. BAMIEH: Objection. Lacks foundation. THE COURT: Sustained. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Ma'am, did you tell him that you

were keeping a diary?

A. Yes. He knew I was. Q Let me just make sure of the question -- you understand the question.

My question was: Did you tell him that you, verbally tell him, you were keeping a diary?

A. Yes.

Q Now, on July 2nd, that was --you testified to the third day after you were attacked, correct?

A. I'm sorry. Ask me again.

Q July 2nd, that was the third day you were attacked, correct?

A. Yes. Q On that day, you said that that was the day you got

up to make coffee for Mr. Parlanti. Do you remember saying that?

A. Yes.

Q And that day, he went to work. Was that true?

A. Yes.

Q And on this day, for his diary entry, did you put anything about any violence on that day happening?

A. No.

Q This diary, it ends -- the last entry is July 5th and 7th.

THE COURT: Is that a question, Mr. Bamieh? Q (By Mr. Bamieh) Is that correct, ma'am?

A. Yes.

Q Now, ma'am, in this diary, when you wrote these in diaries, were they --did you keep them in the same location?

A. No. Q You kept them in two separate locations?

A. Yes, generally. Q I'm sorry, ma'am?

A. Generally, yes. Q And where would you keep the Carlo Parlanti diary?

A. In the front room. Q In the front room?

A. Yes. Q The living room area?

A. Yes. Q And where would you keep the --your diary?

A. Under my side of the bed under the mattress.

Q Now, the --when you said on the end of the 29th, after Mr. Parlanti asked you to leave him alone and you went to the bedroom, did you stop off in the front room and write in that diary first?

A. No. I just happened to have them both by my bed that night.

Q Okay. So they were right by your bed that night, correct?

A. Yes. Q And that night, right by your bed, is a pen, I

guess?

A. Yes, because the phone was on my side of the bed. Q And so, you have one pen on that side of the bed?

A. A note pad and a pen and the telephone, yes.

Q The --and so, you used that pen to write in both diaries, I take it?

A. Yes.

Q You didn't have to go someplace else and get another pen, did you?

A. There may be different pens there, I don't remember.

That was three years ago. MR. BAMIEH: May I approach, your Honor, again? THE COURT: Yes. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) The color of ink on the 29th of

June, please, on that --in the Carlo Parlanti diary, what color of ink is that?

A. Blue.

Q Showing you now your diary, marked as People's 25, see that; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q Your entry for the 29th of June, what color ink is that, ma'am?

A. It's black.

Q Ma'am, your testimony was that you were in bed in your pajamas, and Mr. Parlanti ran into the bedroom or came into the bedroom, correct?

A. Yes. Q And he grabbed you by the arm?

A. Yes.

Q And he brought you towards the bulletin board towards the front entrance way of your apartment, correct?

A. Yes. Q And he was enraged at this point, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And, in your opinion, obviously intoxicated, correct?

A. Yes.

Q The at the time --at that time, he grabbed you by the hair on both sides; is that true?

A. No. He grabbed me by the left arm. Q I'm sorry. Let me take that back.

At the time, at the bulletin board, he then grabbed you by both sides of your hair and banged your head into the bulletin board, correct?

A. He did not grab me by my hair. Q Okay. Explain to me where he grabbed you, ma'am.

A. He grabbed me by -- Q The jaw?

A. By my face, I guess you would say, yeah.

Q Now, what I'm looking at, you have both hands under your face; is that correct?

A. Yes. Q And he grabbed you in that fashion?

A. Yes.

Q Now, that's the way you put your hands. I take it his hands would be the opposite

direction --

A. Yes. Q -- is that fair?

A. Yes.

MR. BAMIEH: Your Honor, with the Court's permission, I'm going to ask Investigator Thayer to stand up. I'm going to do an example to -- see if he agrees with that -- I'm going to put my hands on his neck, basically.

THE COURT: All right. You need to do it from behind, Mr. Romero.

Can you see Mr. Thayer? THE WITNESS: Yes. Q (By Mr. Bamieh) If I'm right, please tell me, the

hands were like this on your neck; is that correct?

A. Move them up. Q Higher?

A. Yes. Q Like that? Is that true? Yes?

A. Yes. Q Thank you.

And at that point, he exerted pressure on your throat; is that correct? Mr. Parlanti exerted pressure on your throat?

A. No. He's pushing my head backwards against the wall.

Q All right. In order to do that, I take it you can feel his hands on your throat, pushing, correct?

A. More under --under the jaw area than the throat

area.

Q Well, if you had to describe the force with your head hitting the back of the bulletin board, would you describe it as gently or describe it as hard or extremely violent? How would you describe that?

A. Jarring. Q Jarring.

So, you felt like he was using his full force to bang your head against the wall?

A. Yes.

Q And you consider him to be an extremely strong man, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And it was your testimony that this man, Mr. Parlanti, this extremely strong man, banged your head against this bulletin board 30 times?

A. Yes. Q At least 30 times, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And that number, by the way, ma'am, that number, that's very vivid in your memory; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q That's --there's no mistaking that number; is that correct?

A. It's an estimated amount, sir.

Q Ma'am, did you estimate an amount of times Mr. Parlanti banged your head against the wall when you spoke to the police on July 18th of '02?

A. I'm not understanding what you're asking.

Q On July 18th of '02, when you spoke to the police officer, ma'am, you never said Mr. Parlanti banged your head 30 times against the wall, did you?

A. I believe the question was: Did he bang your head ten times? did he bang your head 20 times? did he bang your head 30 times? And I said 30.

Q You believe you told the police you banged your head 30 times against the wall?

A. Speak slower, please, and ask me one more time.

Q It's your testimony you believe you told the officers on the 18th of July that Mr. Parlanti banged your head against the wall 30 times; is that your testimony?

A. That's what I believe, yes.

Q Now, when you spoke --after this --on July 19th of '02, you talked to a different officer, correct, ma'am?

A. Yes.

Q When you spoke to that officer, ma'am, isn't it true you never told him that Mr. Parlanti banged your head against the bulletin board 30 times?

A. I believe I did tell him that.

Q Now, after Mr. Parlanti banged your head against this bulletin board 30 times, then he threw you against the adjacent wall; is that correct?

A. After talking with me, yes.

Q When you say "after talking to you," what is the quote he said to you?

A. He told me that he wanted me to leave.

Q He wanted you to leave?

A. Yes. First he said he wanted me to leave, and I told him, Please let me get my pants on, because I was in my pajamas.

And then he said, "I didn't want you to leave. I wanted you to get down on your hands and knees and beg me to stay."

Q That quote right there, ma'am, have you ever given that quote to --did you give that quote to the officer on the 18th of '02?

A. No.

Q Did you give it to the officer on the 19th of '02, that same quote?

A. They didn't ask me for quotes.

Q Ma'am, isn't it true they asked you to tell them what happened? Isn't that true, ma'am?

A. Yes.

Q Isn't it true they also --during -- when you told them what happened, you provided lots of quotes that Mr. Parlanti said during the incident?

A. At times, yes.

Q And isn't it true that the one quote that you never reported him saying was that quote you just said, ma'am? Isn't that true?

A. I don't remember.

Q Ma'am, after he made those statements to you, the next act that you testified to was him slapping you across the face; is that correct?

A. After he shoved me against the wall, yes.

Q And you said he slapped you ten times across the face; is that correct?

A. With his open hand, back and front, yes.

Q And those were --would it be fair to say those were extremely hard slaps?

A. Yes.

Q The --those slaps, ma'am, after he did that, he then pulled you back over towards the bulletin board?

A. No. Q Did you ever go back toward the bulletin board?

A. Yes, but not at that time.

Q Okay. After the time he slapped you, what's the next act that occurred?

A. He banged my head against the wall again.

Q After he slapped you, he banged your head against the wall?

A. Yes. Q The same wall or different wall?

A. Same wall. Q So, I asked a bad question.

Not the wall with the bulletin board on it, but the other wall; is that correct?

A. Correct.

Q And how many times did he bang your head against that wall, ma'am?

A. Approximately, 30 times. Q He banged your head another 30 times on the other

wall; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q When you talked to the officer on 7-18-02, you never mentioned at that time that he banged your head 30 additional times on the adjacent wall, correct?

A. I don't remember, sir.

Q On 7-19 of '02, when you talked to the officer, you never mentioned that he banged your head on the adjacent wall 30 more times; isn't that correct?

A. I don't recall. Q Ma'am, we had a preliminary hearing on the 25th of

this year. Do you remember that, ma'am.

A. Yes.

Q At that time, at that preliminary hearing, either on direct examination by Mr. Romero or cross-examination by me, you never mentioned that Mr. Parlanti banged your head 30 more additional times against the adjacent wall, did you?

A. I said he banged my head against the wall -- Q Ma'am --

A. -- the second time. I may not have said how many times, but I did say he banged my head against the wall. Please read it. It does say that.

Q Have you read your preliminary hearing transcript before testifying, ma'am?

A. Not today, no. Q When did you last read it?

A. Several weeks ago.

Q Ma'am, once again, please listen to my question.

At the preliminary hearing, did you testify that Mr. Parlanti banged your head against the adjacent wall 30 times?

A. Not 30 times, no, I did not.

Q Ma'am, just prior to the preliminary hearing, you were asked to review the police reports in this case, were you not, by Mr. Romero?

A. Yes.

Q And you did review the police reports prior to testifying at the preliminary hearing?

A. Yes, that morning. Q And you probably -- did you review them before testifying after that time? Let me ask a better question.

After the preliminary hearing, you next returned to Ventura County in November of this year; is that correct?

A. Excuse me, sir. You need to slow down. Q Sure.

After the preliminary hearing, you next to returned to Ventura County in November of '05, correct?

A. Ask me one more time. Q Sure. After the preliminary hearing -- let me do it this way.

You came to the preliminary hearing, and you were in Ventura, correct?

A. Yes. Q And you left Ventura, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And then in November '05, you came back to Ventura, true?

A. Yes.

Q And at that time, did you read the police reports again?

A. No.

Q You just read your preliminary hearing transcript again?

A. Yes.

Q So, as I understand your testimony, now that you -- first, your head was banged 30 times against the bulletin board, true?

A. Yes.

Q And then you were slapped? On the adjacent wall, you were slapped ten times, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And then in addition to that, your head was banged 30 more times against the adjacent wall, correct?

A. Correct.

Q Now, did Mr. Parlanti, when -- those 30 additional times, when he banged your head, did he do it in the same method and manner as he did it the first time he banged your head 30 times against the wall?

A. No. Q What was different?

A. His hand was partly collapsed over my mouth, and a different part of my head was striking against the wall.

Q Okay. Was it with less force?

A. No. Q It was still with the same extreme force, correct?

A. Maybe more.

Q Now, when we previously talked about -- you wrote a letter to Dr. Farber, Barbara Farber, correct?

A. Yes.

Q In that letter, you wrote to Miss -- Dr. Farber, excuse me, it was your intention to tell her the truth of what Mr. Parlanti had done to you?

A. To the best of my recollection at that time, yes. Q Do you remember when you wrote that letter, ma'am?

A. No.

Q If I said it was in August --sorry -- September of '02, would that --would that be within the range that you would remember?

A. Yes.

Q And at that time, did you have any intention not to tell her the truth of what happened between you and Mr. Parlanti?

A. At no time did I have an intention not to tell the truth.

Q So, when you wrote to her, it was your desire to be as accurate as possible about the incident that occurred between and you Mr. Parlanti, true?

A. To my ability, yes.

Q Now, you wrote a statement to --let me make sure I'm clear on this.

In your letter to Dr. Farber, you talked -- is it not true that you told Dr. Farber that Mr. Parlanti sprayed chocolate cream up your nose and down your throat?

A. Yes, he did.

Q Okay. Now, you did not tell that to the police officers, did you?

A. I completely forgot about that, yes.

Q Ma'am, my question was: You never told that to the police officers, did you?

A. No, I didn't.

Q And you never --you never told that in anything you wrote to the police officers, did you?

A. No.

Q You never testified about that in court before, did you?

A. No. I forgot.

Q The --you told Dr. Farber that you had to report this incident because you went and saw a doctor and the doctor would not treat you unless you reported Mr. Parlanti; isn't that correct?

A. That's true. Q So, let's go back now.

The --you testified that you made a decision to report Mr. Parlanti, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And that it was further influenced by your father; is that correct?

A. I'm sorry. You need you to repeat it, but you also

need to repeat it slower.

Q Your decision to report Mr. Parlanti was further influenced by your father, correct?

A. That's not exactly what I said.

Q Isn't it true that you said your father placed additional pressure on you to report Mr. Parlanti to the police?

A. Yes. Q Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q You told Dr. Farber that the reason you reported him is "The doctor wouldn't treat me unless I turned him in, and I wouldn't get help from anyone unless I turned him in."

Do you remember saying that to Dr. Farber?

A. I had called the doctor, and they told me that they

would not treat me. That was true. Q What doctor is that, ma'am?

A. It was a doctor I called in the phone book. Q In Ventura County?

A. Yes.

Q Did you use your cell phone or your --or the regular phone?

A. I don't remember. Q And you spoke to a doctor on the phone?

A. Yes.

Q And that doctor on the phone told you that he could not help you or treat you for your injuries unless you went to the police?

A. Because I was honest. I told him what happened.

Q And he said he would have nothing to do with you unless you went to the police first, right?

A. That's right.

Q Now, uhm... ma'am, do you remember telling Brian Whitney that you would not report Mr. Parlanti to the police if he stayed with you?

A. No. I did not say that. Q You've never said that?

A. No, I did not. Q That -- your opinion to turn in Mr. Parlanti to the police --sorry. Let me backtrack.

You never said, ma'am, that if Mr. Parlanti would have apologized or stayed with you, that you would not have turned him into the police?

A. That is not what I said. Q Ever write that in an e-mail?

A. That has been changed. I did not say that. Q Ma'am, did you ever write that in an e-mail?

A. No. Q Then let me just make sure we're clear.

Either to Mr. Whitney, Mr. --Ms. Anedda, did you ever write that to either one of them?

A. No. MR. BAMIEH: Can't find what I was looking for. We will continue this on Monday.

Q (By Mr. Bamieh) The letter you wrote to Mr. --let me be clear on this.

The letter you wrote to Mr. Whitney or the e-mail you sent to Mr. Whitney, Ms. White, you described this incident to him; is that correct?

You wrote an e-mail to Mr. Whitney where you described this incident to him; is that correct?

A. I did, but I haven't seen the e-mail that you're talking about.

Q And that e-mail -- when you say you didn't see that e-mail...

A. You haven't shown it to me, sir.

Q Prior to the preliminary hearing, ma'am, had you provided the District Attorney's Office with e-mails that went back between yourself and Ms. Anedda?

A. Yes. Q You did that prior to the preliminary hearing?

A. Yes.

Q And you provided as many e-mails as you could find off your computer; is that correct?

A. I gave them ever single e-mail that was ever between me or anyone, and you have any -- that was not from --that was from someone else. They are not from me.

Q Ma'am, my question again: Did you provide the District Attorney's Office with your e-mails and the e-mails you received prior to the preliminary hearing?

A. Ask me again.

Q Prior to the preliminary hearing, did you provide the District Attorney's Office with all the e-mails that you had in your position related to this case?

A. Yes.

Q Okay. Now, to do that, ma'am, you had to go into your computer and go back a few months, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And that's -- probably took a lot of time and effort on your part; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q Were you requested to do that by anybody at the DA's Office?

A. Actually, no. I already had them printed out. Q You did that on your own?

A. Yes.

Q Now, when you provided those e-mails, did you keep a copy for yourself, ma'am?

A. No. Q Do you have copies available to you?

A. If I needed them, I'm sure I could get them from

Gilbert. Q From Mr. Romero?

A. Yes.

Q And ma'am, isn't it true that during --from about January '05 until very recently, that you stayed in pretty close e-mail communication with the District Attorney's Office, correct?

A. I'm sorry. Ask me that again. Q Let me ask it a little better maybe.

You sent a number of e-mails to District Attorney Investigator Dave Williams; is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q It would be fair to say you probably sent over 50 e-mails to Mr. Williams, true?

A. Yes.

Q And in those e-mails, you told him how to get a hold of certain witnesses, correct?

A. Yes.

Q And when you did that, ma'am, you usually would contact the witnesses first to let them know that Mr. Williams may be getting in touch with them, correct?

A. Sometimes, yes.

Q And you would even tell the District Attorney's Office, for instance, where they wanted to interview your mother, when a good time to interview her would be, correct?

A. Ask me that again.

Q Sure. In terms of your mother, you even told the District Attorney's Office when a good time would be to interview your mother, correct?

A. Yes. Q The -- MR. BAMIEH: Your Honor, actually, this would be a good

time to stop, if that's okay with the Court.

THE COURT: All right. Let me talk to counsel at bench before we break. ///

(Bench conference held off the record.) /// THE COURT: All right. Thank you, gentlemen.

Folks we are going to break until 9 o'clock Monday morning. Between now and the time you come back to court, please don't discuss this case, please do not form or express opinions. Have a nice weekend. See you Monday morning at 9 o'clock.

Ms. White, you may step down, ma'am. I'll see you back here at that time, too. Counsel, I'll talk with the two of you in chambers before you go home. --oOo--

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF VENTURA

COURTROOM 26 HON. JAMES P. CLONINGER, JUDGE

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF

CALIFORNIA,

⁾⁾⁾⁾₎₎₎₎

Plaintiff,

vs. No. 2002026651 Reporter's CARLO PARLANTI, Certificate

⁾⁾₎₎

Defendant.

Copies of this transcript are not certified and do not conform with the provisions of Government Code Section 69954(d) For certified Copy please contact :

 Official Reporter 800 South Victoria Avenue Room 313 Ventura, California 93009

 Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of California, for the County of Ventura, do hereby certify that the foregoing pages numbered 1 through 68, and 110 through 154, inclusive, are a full, true, and correct transcript of the proceedings held on DECEMBER 9, 2005, in the above-entitled cause.

Dated at Ventura, California, this _____ day of _______________, 20____.

ERIKA A. SJOQUIST, RPR, CSR 12350 Official Reporter

*Please Note: Copies of this transcript are not certified and do not conform with the provisions of Government Code Section 69954(d) unless they bear the original signature of Erika A. Sjoquist.