Clarence Darrow was a famous, early 20th-century

attorney, and he represented John Scopes, Scopes' monkey trial

is probably his most famous case. He was a criminal defense

lawyer and a labor lawyer. He also represented Leopold and

Lowe, two well-to-do guys from the Midwest who were charged

and I believe they pled guilty to killing a young guy. Those

are probably his two more well-known cases, but he had a very

long and distinguished career.

And one of the persons he represented in about 1920

was a young guy, who was accused of bombing the Los Angeles

Times Building, here in Los Angeles. And the prosecution in

that case had a star witness. They had a person who

personally I.D.'d this defendant running away from the scene

of the bombing of the L.A. Times Building.

So, the district attorney's office in Los Angeles

sent Mr. Darrow the statement of this witness and he read it.

And sure enough, "I saw your client bombing the building, and

I saw him run away." Mr. Darrow hired his investigator, and

he sent this investigator out to talk to this witness. He got

the report back, looked at it, same thing. Looked at the initial report

that he was provided by the district's attorneys office, exact

deputies were given transcripts, taped transcripts, verbatim,

word for word, of what was spoken three years ago; given an

opportunity to review them before they came on the stand to

testify, and they couldn't remember what they were talking

about. They had to keep referring to the report. And in

fact, they just kept reading through the report when they were

being asked questions. They weren't testifying on their

memory. They were -- "Yeah, that's what it says here. That's

what it says here." And I made that objection two times with

both deputies. I was watching. Several questions. "Oh,

yeah, that's what it says here. That's what it says here."

Ms. White didn't have an opportunity to do that, to look at

her transcript, taped statements, and see exactly what she

said.

That's what the defense is trying to do here. They

are trying to get the record as messy as possible. Looking at

your notes, you probably don't have an exact word-for-word

exchange of what was said on the stand because it was so

minuscule, so tiny, it was difficult to follow everything that

was being said. The defense wants you to lose focus of the

big picture by pointing out every single variation, including

the most miniscule of each of Ms. White's statements, but I'm

asking you, look at the core.

In all of the information that was launched at

Ms. White while she was on the stand for those three days, all

the e-mails, all the letters that were given to her, was --

was it ever stated that she said she lied? that she said she

was not beaten? that she said that she was not raped? Did

that ever happen? No. Ms. White never made that statement.

She might have talked about it endlessly to anyone she can

think of, but did she ever say she lied? that she was not

raped? that she was not beaten? No, she did not.

Well, we have people who came in and testified

that they saw Ms. White shortly after the 29th walking slow.

None of them said they saw any bruising on her face. None of

them recalled that, but they do recall her walking very slow.

She was not making eye contact. Couple people said she was

kind of looking down. Before that, she would say "hi." She

would look at them. "How're you doing?" Superficial

greetings. But then remember her -- and I think it was Kevin

Bunch and Sarah Campbell said, "Yeah, after the 29th, you

know, she really wasn't making eye contact with us anymore.

Didn't see any bruising, don't really recall any arguments,

any loud noise on the 29th coming from their apartment or

anywhere around that time, but I remember there was something

different in her demeanor." Corroborating evidence.

The photographs that Ms. White took of herself in

the bathroom. She took two photographs of the bruising to her

face with the disposable camera, and she kept them. During

this time, she's still living with the defendant. She's still

sleeping in the same bed right next to him, and she was only

zip tied to him at night.

During the day, he would be gone. She would be able

to leave if she wanted to. Why didn't she leave? I can't

answer that question. I'm sure there are profound,

psychological reasons why Ms. White stayed in that apartment;

why she did not just call 9-1-1; why she did not just go to a

neighbors; why she didn't do a number of things. She did take

pictures of herself.

Almost three weeks later from the date of the

incident, she finally does go to the sheriff's department, on

July 18th, and they take photographs of Ms. White. And they

also came in and testified to the best of their recollection

they don't really remember seeing that type of bruising on her

face or any bruising; don't really remember seeing that

bruising on her face. Well, they do recall seeing some faded

bruising on her arm,Jody Keller, is the one who took these photographs,

and she said,

"She might have had some bruising on her arm, and I think I

remember seeing some bruising on her back near her ribs."

Well, almost three weeks later, the bruising that

she suffered faded. So when she went to the deputy sheriff,

that evidence was not there at that time, but there is another

injury that she had that doesn't heal like bruises, does not

heal that quickly. Three weeks or so was not enough time.

And what I'm talking about is the two fractured ribs that she

had.

On July 22nd, she goes to Doctors On Duty in

Monterey, and she sees Dr. Troy Manchester, and she gets

treated. And Dr. Manchester takes x-rays of her ribs because

she's been complaining of this pain. She's been having

problems, walking slow. The residents at the apartment

complex testified to that. The sheriff's deputies testified

to that, her moving kind of slow. She's got two fractured

ribs. You can tell -- he can put the fractured ribs, in his

opinion, as happening between two and six weeks before. July

22nd, two to six weeks before. That puts June 29, 2002 in

that range. Takes a lot longer for fractured ribs to heal

than it does for bruises. That is corroborating evidence.

And the defense might come up and argue that: Well,

she could have fractured her ribs doing a number of things.

The evidence was clear that when Dr. Manchester examined her,

she had no other injuries on her face. She wasn't in no

recent car accident where she still -- where her ribs hit the

steering wheel possibly. There was no bruising there.

Corroborating evidence that the defendant beat her on

June 29th.

What other corroborating evidence do you have that

the defendant did this to Ms. White? Sandra Lavagnino.

Sandra Lavagnino came in, and she testified that the defendant

was charming in their relationship when they first started

dating. She fell in love with him, and she moved into his

apartment. And once she was in his apartment, that's when the

abuse started. She talked about lying in bed, sleeping.

Defendant comes in and throws cold water on her. Other

occasions, lying in bed, sleeping. Defendant comes in and

flips the bed over. No apparent reason. She talks about the

defendant choking her to unconsciousness. She talked about

the defendant and her having a conversation and something

being said, she didn't recall exactly what, but the defendant

then just losing it, threw her in the sink, hit her with a

colander on her head, ripped off her dress and lit it on fire.

The defendant likes the power and control. He takes

out his frustrations on his significant others. That's what

Now, I admit that when she was initially asked on

cross-examination about the diaries that she said, "I think I

made them both at the same time the few minutes that I had

before he came in and pulled me out of bed." And my response

to that is: You can't expect a person who has been testifying

for three days about an incident that lasted several hours,

more than three years ago, to remember every little thing that

happened. That's unreasonable. That is unreasonable to

expect that.

What did Ms. White gain by coming and testifying for

three days in this trial? She's got no lawsuit against the

defendant or his company. She did not take any money from the

defendant even though he gave her power of attorney over his

finances. She didn't take any of his money; had the

opportunity, did not do it.

And in opening arguments, Mr. Bamieh actually said,

"Ms. White is the one with the power in this relationship.

She had the power of attorney." Well, that was before you

heard the testimony. Did Ms. White have any power in that

relationship? No, she did not. She didn't take his

belongings. She took photographs of the apartment before she

left. And in it, it has all of his belongings; his suit, his

computer. You can all see it clearly there in the photograph.

She didn't even take the furniture.

There was an e-mail that she sent about the

defendant promising to pay for her daughter's -- for her

daughter's college education. And because of that, Heather

should get the computers, but that didn't happen. That was

Ms. White talking out of anger after what Mr. Parlanti did to

her, and she's talking to everybody.

She sat through several days of examination. She

was asked tough questions both by the prosecution and by the

defense. And she came back day after day after day and

answered those tough questions. The defense stated in their

opening statement that it was Ms. White, who was driving this

investigation.

Well, you heard her daughter Heather Reeves come to

court and testify. And she said, "I flew out to help my mom

move." Didn't see any bruising on her face; packed up her

stuff, spent the night in the hotel, and drove up to Monterey.

She was being honest. Was Heather Reeves being honest? Was

she credible about her testimony? Did she say, "Oh, my mom

was so beaten up"? No. She told you what she remembers three

years ago.

I'm asking you to look at the big picture. Look at

all the evidence. Look at what Ms. White testified to and

look at the evidence that corroborates what she said. If you

consider all the evidence in this case, it's clear that the

defendant beat, bound, and raped Ms. White for the simple

reason is that he could. That's what he liked to do to

Ms. White on this occasion.

He saw Ms. White not as a person, but as another one

of those things he collects. He's a Romeo, who likes to go

out and meet women and talk to women and enchant them. That's

what he does.

Look at all the evidence. Look at the big picture.