Jury begins rape trial deliberations

A jury began deliberating Friday in the case of an Altadena man

accused of a series of four rapes in La Crescenta and Pasadena in

2001.

Clifton Hutchins is charged with of 17 counts of forcible rape,

forcible oral copulation, burglary, prowling and possession of

cocaine for sales.

The nine-woman, three-man jury was sworn in Friday after hearing

closing statements from and Deputy District Atty. Natalie Adomian and

defense attorney Mark Davis, but broke shortly after 4 p.m.

The jury will reconvene Monday.

The trial began Sept. 12 before Pasadena Superior Court Judge C.

Edward Simpson.

Hutchins is accused of forcibly raping three women from Pasadena

and one La Crescenta woman between June and November 2001. He was

also charged with three counts of burglary, prowling and possession

of cocaine for sales.

Hutchins was on parole for a federal drug conviction when he was

arrested in November 2001 on suspicion of prowling outside a La

Crescenta home. After being freed on bond for the prowling, police

suspected Hutchins of assaulting a woman in the same neighborhood a

month prior.

Each attack -- three in Pasadena and one in La Crescenta --

happened late at night at homes of women who were alone that were

within one mile north of the Foothill (210) Freeway, police said.

The prosecution alleges Hutchins wore a mask or face covering,

gloves and turned off the lights each time he attacked his victims

and twice forced his victim to shower after the attack. In three of

the four late-night incidents, Adomian said Hutchins broke in knowing

the woman inside was alone and would not have any further visitors.

Evidence matching Hutchins’ DNA was collected from the four rape

kits by different forensics nurses, she said.

“Because of the overwhelming evidence, we’re asking you to find

the defendant guilty of each of these charges,” Adomian said.

But Davis said authorities who arrested the Hutchins celebrated

publicly before producing any reports or testing any DNA evidence. He

questioned the ability of each victim to identify anyone in a

darkened room, even going to the effort of shutting off most of the

courtroom’s lights and using a baby monitor to see if his eyes could

be made out in the darkness.

“Yes, I’m making a big deal out of the identifications,” Davis

said. “They’re not to be trusted.

During the trial, a forensics expert testified that he used five

points of comparison to match fingerprints found at one of the

victims’ home to Hutchins. Davis pulled out a print-out picture of

actress Halle Berry and compared it to the court reporter and found

five points of comparison.

“You can pull this stuff up on the Internet,” Davis said. “It’s

not science. Anyone can learn about this stuff.”

Davis did not try to explain how Hutchins’ DNA was collected from

four different women, but instead brought up a transcript that

criticized the crime lab where the evidence was analyzed.

“At minimum there’s seven criticisms,” Davis said. “In the system

they put in place to protect evidence, there’s a giant gap from when

the sample was tested.

“If you’re comfortable with the integrity of the evidence, then

you have to convict, you have to.”

That there was month between the receipt of the DNA evidence and

when it was tested, and a lack of standards in comparing

fingerprints, should give the jurors doubt, he said.

“The evidence is not reliable,” Davis said. “If you have reason to

pause, if you have reason to wonder, if you have reason to doubt,

then you [have to] find my client not guilty.”

Prosecutors said the defense is oversimplifying the interpretation

of the evidence and is translating it so it does not make sense.

Computer records of DNA evidence might be incomplete, but the

analysts work from case files and did not have any trouble answering

questions about the DNA analysis process on the stand, she said. In

addition, the DNA evidence was sealed and at the crime lab’s secure

building before Hutchins’ was ever arrested, she said.

“To say that in four cases, the defendant’s DNA just happened to

come up just doesn’t make sense,” Adomian said. “You’re here to see

that the defendant’s DNA was found in four different cases and

there’s no explanation for how it got there. Our evidence shows

clearly the defendant raped these four women.”