REPORTER’S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

 

AARON J. MINTZ, CSR NO. 5102

OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER

 

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:

 

FOR DEFENDANT: GREGORY HAIDL:

 

JOSEPH CAVALLO

ATTORNEY AT LAW

 

THE COURT: I DO WANT TO MAKE A RECORD ABOUT THIS.

 

I THOUGHT THAT MR. CAVALLO, FROM THE FIRST TIME THAT HE APPEARED ON THIS CASE, TO THIS STAGE, HAS ALWAYS BEEN ADAMANT IN YOUR BEHALF AND HAS SOUGHT TO REPRESENT YOUR BEST INTERESTS.

 

I DON’T KNOW OF ANOTHER DEFENSE ATTORNEY THAT HAS STRUGGLED AS MIGHTILY AS HE HAS IN BEHALF OF A PERSON ACCUSED OF MISCONDUCT. THE TYPE OF EVIDENCE THAT WAS PRESENTED, I’M TALKING ABOUT THE VIDEO, IS A SUBSTANTIAL PIECE OF EVIDENCE THAT ANY COUNSEL, NO MATTER HOW EXPERIENCED OR HOW COMPETENT, WOULD HAVE MAJOR DIFFICULTIES.THAT’S MY ASSESSMENT.

 

I DON’T WANT YOU TO COMMENT ON THAT PART. BUT I DO WANT TO SAY THAT I DON’T BELIEVE I’VE EVER SEEN ANOTHER CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY MAKE BEST USE OF TECHNOLOGY OR VISUAL AIDS IN REPRESENTING SOMEONE IN A CRIMINAL PROCEEDING. NO ONE’S ACHIEVED THE LEVEL OF PERFORMANCE BY MR. CAVALLO.

 

I RECOGNIZE WE HAD SOME DISAGREEMENTS, BUT THAT’S WHAT HAPPENS IN LITIGATION. DEFENSE ATTORNEYS, DISTRICT ATTORNEYS, ARE NOT

SUPPOSED TO BE WALK IN LOCK STEP WITH EACH OTHER, AND THEY ARE CERTAINLY NOT SUPPOSED TO BE WALKING IN LOCK STEP WITH THE COURT. THE MATTERS THAT CAME UP AND WERE RULED ON THAT MIGHT HAVE INDICATED SOME DISAGREEMENT WERE SIMPLY AN OUTGROWTH OF INTENSE LITIGATION.

 

SO TO THE EXTENT THAT ANYBODY MIGHT FEEL THAT MR. CAVALLO WAS VIEWED CRITICALLY BY THE COURT, I DON’T WANT ANYBODY TO HAVE THAT IMPRESSION. I THOUGHT HE WAS AND IS AN EXTREMELY FINE ATTORNEY WHO IS OBLIGATED TO REPRESENT THE BEST INTERESTS OF SOMEONE CHARGED WITH THESE TYPES OF SERIOUS MATTER THAT WERE FILED IN THIS CASE.

 

Orange County office.

17897 Macarthur Blvd. #200

Irvine, CA 92614

Office tel. (949) 477- 4004

Fax. (949) 477- 4994