Dennis potts trial san diego

Dennis Potts, 25, was convicted in September of two counts of first-degree murder and one count of conspiracy to obstruct justice in the deaths of year-old Tori Vienneau and her month-old son, Dean Springstube. Their bodies were found July 26, , in a Southcrest apartment where Vienneau had been staying. Recognizing each murder as a separate crime, San Diego Superior Court Judge Bernard Revak ordered Potts to serve two consecutive terms of life without parole.

The judge noted that Potts planned the killings ahead of time and then took pains to cover his tracks. Prosecutors contended during the trial that Potts killed Vienneau to avoid paying child support and to protect his lifestyle. He had not told his parents or fiancee he had fathered a son. Police ID mother, toddler who fell to their deaths at Petco Park; investigation ongoing. Hundreds died of drug overdoses last year in San Diego County — and the number keeps rising, authorities say.

Motorcyclist seriously injured in crash at Chula Vista intersection. Woman, 18, killed in multi-vehicle crash in Oceanside. Charges dismissed against Riverside County woman accused of killing boyfriend in Real Estate News.

Hot Property. Public Safety 3 arrested in death of man shot in Spring Valley apartment. Public Safety Escondido police release names of two officers who shot, killed homicide suspect.

South County Chula Vista declares trash strike a public health emergency, deploys city workers to pick up overflow. Courts Former corrections officer sentenced for smuggling drugs, phones into prison. Facebook Twitter Show more sharing options Share Close extra sharing options. By Dana Littlefield. Dana Littlefield. Follow Us twitter email facebook. Support our journalism. Submit a story tip. Report a problem with this story. More from this Author. Public Safety Hundreds died of drug overdoses last year in San Diego County — and the number keeps rising, authorities say.

Public Safety Motorcyclist seriously injured in crash at Chula Vista intersection. Public Safety Woman, 18, killed in multi-vehicle crash in Oceanside. About a foot away from Vienneau was her cell phone, among other items. He noted there were no signs of a struggle, as the living room was not in disarray and the only furniture overturned in that room was a small child's stool. Detective Tefft found one of Vienneau's legs was unclothed, while the other leg was partially clothed by her jeans.

Vienneau's underwear was down to her knees. Vienneau's blouse was torn, but she was still wearing her bra. Detectives later determined the crime scene had been staged by Vienneau's attacker to make it appear that Vienneau had been the victim of a sexual assault. Detectives came to this conclusion because their investigation showed no physical evidence to support a sexual assault, such as semen or ejaculate on Vienneau's jeans or underwear, or the floor in the living room.

Detective Tefft found there was blood on Vienneau's head, but none on her hands or feet. Detective Tefft testified this finding was significant because most people when they are injured will instinctively use their hands to touch the injury, resulting in a transfer of blood. Detective Tefft also found no evidence of any "defensive wounds" on Vienneau's hands or forearms, or evidence she was involved in fighting with her attacker e.

As for Dean, Detective Tefft said the child had been strangled with a phone charging cord that was wrapped around the baby's neck and tied to the rail of the playpen. Chief Medical Examiner Glenn Wagner testified Vienneau sustained a deep laceration to the back of her scalp that caused profuse bleeding.

In addition, during the autopsy Wagner discovered a blunt force injury near Vienneau's left ear. Wagner found bleeding on Vienneau's brain from both areas of impact. Wagner surmised the laceration was caused by an instrument of some sort, while the contusion near Vienneau's ear likely was caused by a body part striking the head, such as a fist, a hand or a knee. Wagner also found blunt force trauma to the front of Vienneau's head.

As a result of the presence of petechiae or small, pinpoint hemorrhages on her face, Wagner surmised Vienneau was alive when the ligature was wrapped around her neck. Wagner found no evidence Vienneau fought back or was conscious when she started to bleed, and opined the blunt force injuries rendered her unconscious and she either fell or was placed against the couch, where she was strangled.

Wagner testified that from the condition of Vienneau's clothing it initially appeared she had been the victim of an attempted sexual assault. However, his physical examination showed no evidence to support such an attack. Wagner noted there was no evidence of any sexual assault involving the mouth, the rectum or the vagina either on gross or microscopic examination. As to Dean, the cord around his neck was tied with a "granny" or "overhand" knot as opposed to a square knot that was used to tie the electrical cord around his mother's neck.

Based on the medical evidence, Wagner opined the electrical cord was applied to Dean while he was standing up in the playpen.

Over time, as Dean became fatigued and sat down, he hanged from the cord. At about a. Before they contacted Potts, the detectives informally agreed not to mention to Potts that Dean also had been murdered. During the interview, Potts told detectives he and Vienneau were long-time friends and were physically intimate at one point but not for about a year or two.

Potts told police he last saw Vienneau on July 20, when they discussed getting together after Potts returned from a trip to Las Vegas. Potts told the detectives he left his house at about p. Potts went to Max's house to review surveillance video taken from security cameras at the Potts home to catch the person stealing the family's newspaper. According to Potts, Max had computer software that would allow them to review the surveillance video taken by the Pottses' security cameras.

Potts told detectives he stayed at Max's house until about p. Potts told detectives he and Vienneau did not have dinner plans the evening before. Potts explained he and Vienneau did have a "casual conversation" where they discussed "just going to simply hang out" together, but their plans were "not set in stone.

Potts also told detectives it was Vienneau who had decided the evening before she did not want to get together with Potts. According to Potts, Vienneau instead decided to take Dean to the babysitter and to text Moen at work about hanging out together later that night. In response to questions about paternity testing, Potts admitted to detectives he had taken a paternity test that showed he was not Dean's father. Detective Cristinziani testified that during the entire minute interview, Potts never once asked about the welfare of Dean.

On the morning of September 13, , Detective Tefft executed a search warrant at the Potts family home seeking items related to paternity, Potts's relationship with Vienneau and Potts's computer and digital camera, among other items. Potts denied having the paternity paperwork at the house and told detectives he had erased from his computer any information sought in the warrant.

Detectives nonetheless seized a standard desktop computer from Potts's bedroom and a laptop computer from the family's living room. During execution of the search warrant, Detective Cristinziani asked Potts directly if Potts had tampered with the previous paternity test that showed Potts was not the father of Dean. Potts denied any tampering and said he sent in his own DNA for testing.

In response, Detective Cristinziani told Potts that police had conducted their own paternity test and it showed that Potts was in fact Dean's father. Potts appeared shocked by the news and denied he was the father.

Potts also denied loaning his cell phone to anyone on the day of the murders and confirmed he was at Max's house that evening between and p. Detective Cristinziani told Potts police had obtained Potts's cell phone records and cell tower information from July 26, , and determined Potts was "pinging" from cell towers that were inconsistent with Potts's statement he never left Max's house between and p.

Potts responded the information provided by the phone company must have been wrong. Potts also again denied having any dinner plans that night with Vienneau, suggested Vienneau was a "flake" and said that is why they had not seen each other on the night of the murders. Next, despite his earlier statement to police, Potts said he had received only one text message from Vienneau on the day of the murders and that he had not texted her back.

Detective Cristinziani told Potts that the phone records showed just the opposite, that there had been phone calls and myriad text messages between Potts and Vienneau on July 26, As part of his investigation, Detective Cristinziani obtained from the company the swabs and documents Potts submitted for the mail-in paternity testing. Phone records showed Potts called the testing company for results on July 17 and again on July 19, Cell phone records also showed that Potts called the company four times before he was interviewed by detectives on July 28, , just two days after the murders.

Detectives interviewed Max Corn in late September Max also remained steadfast that he and Potts were together at Max's residence between and p. A computer forensic expert examined the hard drive of the computer taken from Potts's bedroom during execution of the search warrant. The expert, Robert Petracheck, found the following Internet searches deleted from the hard drive of Potts's computer: 1 "committing murder" June 24, ; 2 "where are court-ordered paternity test conducted" same ; 3 "court-ordered paternity test procedure" June 26, ; 4 "how to cheat a swab paternity test" same ; 5 "best way to kill someone" June 28, ; 6 "getting away with murder" June 30, ; 7 "getting out of child support" July 7, ; 8 "performing choke hold" July 19, ; 9 "how to kill someone" same ; 10 "how did you get away with murder" same ; 11 "knocking someone unconscious" July 25, ; and 12 "knocking someone in the head" same.

Petracheck also testified that on August 8, , 20 pages of phone records from Potts's cell phone were downloaded onto Potts's computer from the cell phone company's website. A day later, two entries on page 17 of the downloaded document had been opened and altered.

Specifically, the call log was changed to show that calls at p. The altered version of that document was saved on and printed multiple times from Potts's computer and, according to Petracheck, when printed looked identical to the original log. Petracheck also testified that from the printer cue e. Finally, Petracheck testified that Potts's computer was equipped with two video processing applications, one of which he described as "professional grade" software that was used in the movie industry for editing of motion pictures.

Petracheck noted as part of his investigation he also had reviewed a computer retrieved by police from Max's residence and found a computer program known as "Pinnacle" had been installed on that computer beginning shortly after p. Petracheck testified the program installation was completed at about p. Investigators determined from Potts's cell phone records that between about pm.

Dennis McColl, a senior engineer, testified that cell tower was located about. McColl further testified that if Potts had been at Max's residence at p. Potts testified at his trial. The defense also called as witnesses a telecommunications expert, Potts's mother and father Hannah and Robert Potts , Zolezzi and Max's father Curtis Corn , among others. The People called rebuttal witnesses. The trial court sentenced Potts to two consecutive terms of life without parole, as well as a consecutive term of three years for his conviction in count 3.

During an in limine hearing, the defense sought permission to present a third party culpability defense regarding Moen. The defense noted there was physical evidence directly linking Moen to the crime scene, inasmuch as Moen's semen was discovered in the deceased body of Vienneau.

In addition, the defense noted Moen had the opportunity to commit the murders because during his shift Moen had left work between and p. Although the Savon surveillance video showed Moen at work at p. In support of this theory, the defense argued:. Moen's at the store at [p. Vienneau's body text messaging himself, having deleted the text messages from Mr.

Potts on the phone, for reasons unknown, then he text messages himself, and then he goes back to the store, changes his clothes, I think, as part of the defense theory, and continues there throughout the night. That seems absurd. So there we have it. After the jury was empanelled, over the objection of the prosecutor the trial court agreed to an in-camera discussion with the defense regarding Moen and its third party culpability defense. During that hearing, 7 the defense stated that because Vienneau's phone did not display the time the text messages were sent to, as opposed to when those messages were received by, Moen, its theory was that "Moen sat inside the apartment after he killed the two victims and sent text messages to his phone, understanding what the response back would be.

But the times that show up on his phone are the times that he opened up the text, not when it was sent from Ms. Vienneau['s phone], but when he opened up the text. And [it's] sort of complicated unless you understand cell phones to a certain degree. That's when the time stamp is. It's not when Ms. Vienneau's phone sent it. Because these text messages were deleted off her phone. We don't know when exactly they were sent from her phone. The trial court ruled the defense could present its third party culpability defense involving Moen.

About a week later, at the beginning of the seventh day of trial, during a chambers conference the prosecutor informed the trial court that an issue had developed regarding the timing of the final text messages sent from Vienneau's phone on the night she was murdered. According to the prosecutor, as he, his investigator and a software engineering expert were examining a clone of Vienneau's phone, they realized it had a "message status" feature that gave the date and time a particular text message was sent from that phone.

The prosecution sought to introduce this new "timing evidence" and defense counsel objected, noting:. The trial court agreed to a two-day continuance in order for the defense to obtain a witness to review the clone of Vienneau's phone and get some "answers" regarding the "timing evidence" from Vienneau's phone. The defense subsequently revisited the issue of whether the People could recall their expert to testify about the timing evidence taken from Vienneau's phone, showing when the text messages were sent from that phone on the night of her murder.

Defense counsel noted the prosecutor did not "hide the ball from the defense" with respect to this evidence, and admitted this evidence just "popped up in the middle of trial.

Moen is factually innocent. That's not fair to Mr. In response to the trial court's question regarding how the defense intended to use "the absence of what's on the phone" if the court excluded this evidence, defense counsel replied he would argue the People "can't place the times of.

The trial court responded, "But that's not the true. I understand that. It's a problem. The trial court denied the defense's motion for mistrial and ruled the "timing evidence" from Vienneau's phone was in fact admissible. In so doing, the trial court reasoned a trial is "where we are seeking the truth, and the truth is the phone.

It's there. Potts also contends he was prejudiced by the admission of the timing evidence because he "lost [the] power to cast a reasonable doubt on the prosecution's evidence" with respect to Moen.

Wallace 44 Cal. Clark 52 Cal. As Potts notes in his brief, the trial court properly admitted the "timing evidence" taken from Vienneau's cell phone discovered mid-trial by the People showing the actual times the final text messages were sent from her phone and received by Moen on the night of the murders. In addition, as Potts also notes the prosecution did not violate the discovery disclosure rules in connection with the discovery of such evidence.

That evidence was properly uncovered during trial that may have undermined Potts's third party culpability defense involving Moen does not mean Potts was prejudiced in a constitutional sense or otherwise received an unfair trial. There being no error, we conclude the trial court properly exercised its discretion in denying Potts's mistrial motion.

As a threshold matter, we note that even before the "timing evidence" from Vienneau's cell phone was discovered, Potts's third party defense theory involving Moen was tenuous. The evidence from the video surveillance equipment placed Moen at work at p. Phone records show text messages were exchanged between Moen and Vienneau's phone both before and after p.

The appellate record also shows the apartment where Vienneau was living was about 10 miles from Moen's work, the drive from Moen's work to the apartment and back took at least 35 minutes and that Moen received a final text message from Vienneau's phone at p.

We further note that when the defense proffered its theory that Moen murdered Vienneau and Dean and sent himself text messages from Vienneau's phone to cover up that crime, the defense unequivocally stated it would not be relying on expert testimony to support this theory, which was crucial to its third party culpability defense involving Moen. Thus, the defense never sought to offer any evidence to show how Moen allegedly was able to alter the times of the text messages he allegedly sent himself from Vienneau's phone, after he allegedly killed Vienneau and Dean, so they were recorded as being received by Moen after he returned to work, turned on the video surveillance equipment in the store and purposely looked into the camera with his phone in hand to verify for anyone who subsequently viewed the video he was in fact inside the store at p.

In any event, the record shows the defense was not precluded from presenting its third party culpability defense and arguing at closing this defense created reasonable doubt to acquit Potts of the murders.

The record shows the defense focused suspicion on Moen, claiming Moen finally "snapp[ed]" when he and Vienneau had sexual intercourse a few days before the murders only to be rejected by Vienneau afterwards because of his weight.

What's more, the defense argued that two days before she was murdered Vienneau told Moen she was hanging out with an old boyfriend, which the defense claimed enraged Moen even though Moen testified "he wasn't bothered by it. Specific to the issue at hand, the defense also argued during closing that the timing of the text messages sent from Vienneau's phone to Moen did not establish Moen's factual innocence to the murders:.