Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:11):
The criminal trial of David Pears and brand Osborne is
scheduled to begin in January twenty twenty five. Peerce was
charged in December twenty twenty one with sexually assaulting four
women and now faces eleven charges, including three additional sexual
assault charges, as well as the murders of Christy Giles
(00:35):
and Hilda Marcella Cabrales Arzola. The District Attorney's office filed
the murder and drug charges before taking the case to
the grand jury, which returned the indictment December fourteenth, twenty
twenty two. The prosecution will be led by Los Angeles
County Deputy District Attorney Catherine Mariano. Pierce will be represented
(00:59):
by a defense team made up of Paul Jeffrey Vall,
Leslie and Boyce, and Jonathan Daniel Evans. Osborne, who was
charged with two counts of accessory to murder after the fact,
has retained Michael Arden as his attorney. Michael Ansbach, the
third man who is with Pierce and Osborne that night,
(01:19):
is cooperating with investigators. Let's bring Back Josh Ritter, criminal
defense attorney and former LA County prosecutor, host of Courtroom
Confidential on YouTube, Josh, Pierce and Osborne are being tried together,
how closely are their charges tied to one another.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Osborne's charges are independent and they stand by themselves, and
they are linked to the crime against Pierce, but they
don't rise and fall with how the case plays out
against Pierce. In other words, if Pierce is found guilty
only of man and slaughter, Osborne can still be found
(02:03):
guilty of accessory after the fact, and that doesn't change
his exposure or criminal culpability. In fact, there is even
a scenario where they might feel that they have enough
evidence against Osborne for his involvement, but the jurors could
be undecided between murder and manslaughter on Pierce and hang
(02:25):
on those charges and have to retry him again even
though they've convicted Osborne. So not to get too much
into the weeds, but it is an independent charge and
not necessarily married to what happens with Pierce, but it
is based upon the crime that Pierce committed. According to
(02:48):
the DA's office.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Another interesting point is that the state will combine the
sexual assault and murder charges in one trial. Josh, is
this going to make it easier or more for the
DA's office to prove their case against Peers.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Again going back to the idea of being able to
prove what was David Pierce's intent and whether or not
this was all some sort of horrific accident. I think
the DA realizes that a built in defense to this
is that tragically, in this country, people die from fentanyl
overdose all the time, and that drugs are laced with
(03:26):
fentanyl even without people realizing that, and they want to
avoid any argument that could be made by the defense
that this was somehow just another tragic overdose and that
David Pierce should not be held accountable. And the way
that they're doing that is showed that this isn't an
anomaly in this man's life, but that this was a
(03:50):
runaway train headed directly for this tragic end, that he
had left a trail of women in his wake where
he had things nightmarishly similar to other women in the past,
and it ended here as everyone might have suspected with
(04:10):
a person with these kind of violent, dangerous proclivities towards women.
And so it's important for them to understand that this
wasn't just a guy having a good time on a
night out in Los Angeles, but this is a man
who had assaulted women in a remarkably similar fashion many
(04:32):
times before, and that he had used drugs to assault them,
and that in this instance, when you play with fire,
eventually something like this is going to happen. And what
ended up happening was the tragic death of Christie and Hilda.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
We don't know who will be testifying until they actually
take the stand, but witnesses who already testified to the
grand jury include actor David Marietta, who could be one
of the key witnesses after Brant Osborne told him about
the knight Christie Hilda were killed, LAPD detective Jonathan Vanderley,
(05:09):
as well as the security guard from the hospital in
Culver City where Christie was dropped off. There were also
seven Jane Does who testified to the grand jury. Prosecutors
tell Once Upon a Crime in Hollywood that more victims
are expected to testify. The charges against Pierce include three
(05:29):
separate counts of forcible rape, one count each of sonomy
by YUSUF force and rape of unconscious or asleep person,
and two counts of sexual penetration by USU force. Let's
bring back Trinka Perata, retired narcotics detective after twenty five
(05:51):
years with the Los Angeles Police Department. Now president of
the Project GHB Board and a renowned experts on drug
facilitated sexual assaults. Trinka, you've investigated a number of sexual predators.
What does the timeline of Pierce's charges tell you and
(06:13):
the pattern of very similar accusations dating back to two
thousand and seven.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
Well, the whole history of this guy again, you've got
You've got cases that we'll probably never hear about, people
that have gone on in their lives and may not
even have come forward now. But it sounds like an
escalation and certainly a long term pattern of the headed
to where it ended, unfortunately tragically. It's it's important to
(06:48):
document all that they can. Judges may or may not
allow some of the prior prior cases. A lot of
times we aren't allowed to introduce prior activity even though
it's clearly relevant and it follows the same pattern. But
I think it's important when when judges do allow it,
it's important to show the growth of the person's conduct
(07:11):
that resulted then, in this case, to death. That makes
him a pretty heartless serial predator. So I'm not surprised
at his string of cases and I'm sure there's more,
and it appears to be an escalation of them where
he's involved other people knowing what was going on, other
(07:32):
people involved in helping cover it up, and I think
that shows a growing pattern of misconduct and criminality. So
hopefully that will be well documented and well entered and allowed,
so no surprise in the In the long term, it's
(07:53):
just so tragic that it took so long to really
nail this guy down and stop his spree.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
Now, let's not forget Pierce is also facing two felony
drug charges for providing controlled substance fetanyl. We do know
he met Christy and Hilda at the warehouse party, and
multiple witness told police they observed Peers giving both women cocaine,
including Ansbach, who was with them. During his testimony, Ansboch
(08:29):
also revealed the women had their own supply of kennemine,
and we know from Christie and Hilda's friend Dohee that
they had also done cocaine earlier in the evening at
the art gallery. That could be challenging for the prosecution
to prove the drugs Peers gave them were the ones
that caused their death, not their own drugs, and that
(08:52):
Pierce did so knowingly, Josh, will that be difficult for
the day to prove.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
The defense is obviously going to focus much of their
attention on the idea that Christy and Hilda were willingly
taking drugs themselves that evening. This is not an instance
of where somebody slipped something into their drink at a
bar unaware to them they were taking cocaine. They had
(09:21):
apparently been a possession of their own narcotics, that they
were willingly taking that evening. There's even evidence that their
text communications between the two of them talking about consuming drugs,
and the defense is going to, I imagine, spend a
large part of their attention and time focusing on how
(09:42):
they were taking drugs. They were taking drugs from different sources.
They may have been handed drugs by different individuals other
than David Pierce that evening, and that unfortunately, we live
in a time where sometimes you can just get a
hot dose and that means that a person ends up
dead and it had nothing to do with David Piers.
(10:03):
And that is why his history is so important and
bringing in these other assaults from even years ago where
he had deployed women with drugs is so important to
understand that no, this was no accident. The trouble only
arose after they met David Pierce, and only after they
(10:27):
made the tragic decision to go back to his apartment
and he started to give them further drugs, and he
started to give them cocktails mixed likely with other narcotics
that were I think we can all assume the prosecution's argument,
who's going to be those narcotics were intended to render
(10:49):
them unconscious so that he could sexually assault them, And
even his behavior afterwards, realizing that the drugs were something
that he needed to cover up up, all of that
becomes so much more important, and it's not going to
be a small task for the prosecution. It will be
an undertaking to convince jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that know,
(11:12):
this is not a tragic accident, that know, the drugs
that killed these two women did not come from a
different source, but that it is this man, based upon
what we know about him, based upon his history, based
upon his conduct that evening that led to their deaths.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
Actions speak louder than words. And one of the things
that could potentially be an issue is when once the
girls will start experiencing issues Why wasn't nine to one
one called? Why weren't they immediately taken to the hospital.
We know both women were conscious at five point forty
(11:50):
am from ansbox cell phone video, just minutes after they
shared text about wanting to leave the apartment. We know
after that an uber show up but didn't pick up
the girls, and they spent the next eleven hours inside
the apartment, during which neighbors heard a woman screaming in
pain and moaning on and off during the hours of
(12:13):
ten to thirty am two four pm. From that point,
Pears and Osborne's actions could play a central role in
the trial. Both men were allegedly seen on surveillance footage
carrying Christy and Hilda's body to the car. They were
also seen covering their faces, and hospital staff also confirmed
(12:34):
that mass men had dropped off the girls in the
car with license plates removed Josh. From a legal perspective,
how does removing the license plates and covering up their
faces reflect on the suspects.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
A large part of the prosecution's case is going to
be about what we call consciousness of guilt evidence, meaning
everything that the defendants did afterwards that show that they
knew what they had done, was something wrong that they
had a consciousness of their own guilt and we were
(13:09):
trying to cover up their steps. Had this been a
tragic overdose, anyone would expect them to call nine point
one at the first sign of trouble and try to
get assistance for these women and try to get them
to a hospital as quickly as they can and try
to save their lives. But instead of doing that, David
(13:30):
Pierce took steps specifically to protect himself and therefore likely
cause these women to die by his failure to act
quickly and buy his attempts to cover up what he
had done. And what I'm talking about specifically is driving
them to two separate hospitals at different times, with a
(13:53):
car that did not have a license plate, covering their
faces with masks. All of this is so that they
are not At no point are they taking any steps
to save these women. At no point does it appear
as though they cared about the lives of these two women. Instead,
(14:13):
David Pierce cared only about himself and trying to evade capture,
and that consciousness of guilt evidence will play a significant
role in this trial.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
There is also evidence that Pearce and Osborne went even
further than that to cover their tracks, allegedly coming up
with the story that the girls wandered onto their property,
keeping and destroying hill to cell phone and searching for
non extradition countries or places to disappear. According to the LAPD,
(14:49):
one potential tricky aspect of the trial will be reviewing
the autopsies and making sense of the toxicology results for
both women, which showed rugs in their system and some
evidence of what could be interpreted as foul play. Going
back to doctor j Vargas, Associate professor at California State
(15:12):
University in Los Angeles, doctor, you reviewed both autopsies. How
can the autopsy and the toxicology results help or hurt
the investigation into whether or not David Piers is responsible
for the deaths of Christine and Hilda.
Speaker 4 (15:29):
So I am not I'm not a lawyer. Of course,
I am not a legal expert. But my sort of
view of this case is that, And then again, I
don't have I'm not privy to all of the sort
of I guess all the testimony that may have already
(15:49):
been given on observing these two women that evening ingesting
drugs that sounded like, to me, the way I had,
the experts that I did read said that there was
observations of them, you know, recreationally using drugs at these
(16:10):
at the bar or maybe this rave that they went to.
So there's so that's a point in time where you know,
drugs and a drug laced with fensannel in my opinion,
could have been administered at that point. And then certainly
later on when these two women are at this individual's residence,
(16:30):
that of course is another point in time for sort
of the drugs to be administered. So either way, what
will be most difficult in this case is like motive,
Like you know, were intent is somebody is somebody intending
to kill these individuals knowingly or if it was you know,
(16:53):
sort of involuntary right, And so to me, in this case,
I feel like what will likely be an outcome would
be something like involuntary manslaughter. I mean, I think they're certainly,
they're certainly liable for what happened. If especially if they're
providing drugs for the for these two women, and you know,
(17:17):
if they knew that the drugs RELASD with fencanyl and
that was something that they were going for, then I
think you know, it's possible to even get to like
a second degree murder charge, but it's more likely to
me that they probably didn't understand and they didn't really
know that the drugs released with fencanyl, And so that
(17:38):
to me would be something that would be harder for
someone to prove. I guess would be we knew that
drugs had fencanyl in it. I mean that would go
one way. If they didn't know that their drugs that
they were abusing had fencanyl, then I think it could
go you know, another way.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
How big of a factor is time when it comes
to cases like this and in cases of an overdose.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
If we sort of assume that, you know, fencanyl was
the main driver here. Fencanyl is an extremely potent opioid medication.
It's it's used primarily for you know, people with extreme pain.
And the fact that it's been now produced globally and
(18:25):
it's manufacturer clandestinely sort of produced and brought into the
country various ways and then finding its way into all
sorts of drugs. It's it's on set, it's going to
it's going to happen within you know, once it's ingested.
And again this all it really has to do with
(18:46):
with dose, right, I mean, if small amounts might be
tolerated longer, but you know, if a large amount a
fencanyl comes on board, you would imagine that somebody would
be succumbing to the effects of that and then you know,
pretty quickly would start to you know, fentanyl does have
a rapid onset. It's supposed to write it's a it's
a medication used for pain management and particularly chronic you know,
(19:11):
cancer pain, like really excruciating pain. So this drug is
going to work relatively quickly, and then if too much
is on board, then then that that sort of drug
effect that you know somebody might be going for, that's
going to sort of dissipate and then go towards this
(19:32):
it's it's basically respiratory depression. So that's what ends up
killing people when they have too much of the opioid
on board, the fentanyl, and and so again it's hard
to really put a timeline on it. You know, you know,
it's possible she both of these women could have been
taking if they were getting them maybe from the same person,
(19:54):
all night. It's possible that they sort of may have
been building up this this drug level at the same time.
It's possible that maybe they both got it the largest
dose later on in the night. It's hard to really
put that timing on it, but what is for sure
is that once these observations of labored, shallow breathing and
(20:20):
the person's sort of you know, incapacitated that point, you
really just need that person to get assistance right away.
And of course, you know, we need to breathe to live,
and so if breathing gets to the point where obviously
we're not going to be able to have a great
outcome for those individuals, and so you know, waiting around,
(20:44):
driving them around, dropping them off at hospitals and stuff
like that was just not obviously going to be, in
my opinion, the best outcome because of the time it's passing,
and it's very unfortunate, and I I just just think like,
what could have happened if if these individuals just you know,
(21:06):
saw that you know, hey, this didn't work out the
way we wanted. You know, obviously they're they're sort of
predatory and they're trying to take advantage of these of
these two women, but you know, at some point they
must have realized that they had something is wrong here.
If they just would have you know, called you know,
nine to one one and you know it is it is,
(21:28):
it is possible that they could have survived if they
got sort of an intervention of Melock zone or narcam and.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
The grand jury proceedings, the prosecution also went through the
results of the SART sexual assault exams performed on both
Christy and Hilda, as well as Jane Doe one and five.
Robert Broderick, a criminal list with LAPD who tested the
sexual assault kit performed on Christy. Giles said male DNA
(21:59):
was on the vaginal swabs, external genitilia, neck, breast, and
inner thighs. The mix contained too much female DNA. So
why STR testing was done? Let's welcome doctor Monty Miller,
director of forensic DNA Experts and a specialist in sexual
(22:21):
assaults and murder investigations. Doctor, what is why STR testing
and why was it done in this case?
Speaker 5 (22:32):
So typically, you know, they use what's called autosomal DNA testing,
and you know, everybody has forty six chromosomes and this
particular test, the autosomal DNA testing, attempts to collect information
from most of those chromosomes and so you get a
(22:53):
wide variety of information. You have approximately fifty data points
that you can calculate, and it's very informative and it's
very specific. The YSTR testing allows them to look for
male DNA when there's a lot of female DNA. So
if you have about inside the vagina, for example, there's
(23:16):
an enormous amount of female DNA, and sometimes it's just
hard to find the male DNA. It's like a drop
of blue paint in a bucket of pink paint. You
just don't see that one drop. So the YSTR testing
allows us to look just for that blue drop, just
for the male DNA. And it's not as specific to
(23:37):
single individuals, but it does allow us to find a
family male tree that the DNA came from, and it
does help us identify people when there's a lot of
female DNA and very little male DNA.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
The blood was taken from Piers, Osborne and Ansbach then
test it against the DNA evidence found on Christie for
a potential match. Roderick said when the results came back,
the DNA from samples from the inner thigh and external
genitilia matched the profile of David Pearce and excluded Osborne
(24:15):
and Annsbach, Doctor Miller, what can you tell us about
the mix of Pearce's DNA found in the samples from
Christie's sexual assault exam?
Speaker 5 (24:27):
Overall, it's clear that his DNA is present in and
on Christie Giles, in and around her you know, vagina
and other areas. There's an indication that that that might
be semen, though that wasn't confirmed. On Hilda Cabrals, you know,
(24:51):
his DNA is found on both her left and right fingernails.
There's male DNA on Christy Giles on her vaginal sample,
anal sample, external sample, neck breasts, and inner thighs. There
is DNA from David Pierce in Jane Doe's vagina Jane
(25:13):
Do number five. There is DNA from David Pierce on
Jane Doe's face and neck. And so we know his
DNA overall is on all of these women, and with
the exception of Jane Doe number one, well and even
Hilda Marcella. It's on Jane Do number one and Hilda Marcella,
(25:37):
it's not in an intimate region, whereas on Christy Giles
and Jane Doe number five it's clearly in an intimate region.
So he's had some interaction with all of these people,
and that much is known, and that much is clear,
But none of this really establishes that he killed and
(25:59):
he or did anything else. He could have simply had
sex with the Christy Giles and had some you know,
physical interaction with Hilda, Marcella, Jane Doe number five. You know,
it looks like he probably had sex with her and
Jane do number one. His DNAs are on her face
(26:21):
and next. So overall he's been in contact with these women.
But this in and of itself doesn't tell the story.
It just places him in places and taking actions that
are clear and unmistakable in some cases, but it really
doesn't tell us the context of those things.
Speaker 1 (26:43):
But that wasn't all. A sexual assault exam was also
performed on Hilda while she was still in hospital, though
it wasn't done until three days after she was dropped off.
On November sixteenth, Carolyn Clark, another criminalist with the LA Count,
found a small, approximately five millimeter abrasion in Hilda's vagina,
(27:06):
as well as another small abrasion to her lower abdomen.
For Hilda, only fingernail swabs provided enough DNA for analysis. Now,
this could be due to the extensive cleaning procedures that
she underwent during her time in the hospital, and thus
the only DNA that was available were in her fingernails.
(27:28):
The DNA mixture found underneath both Hilda's fingernails matched two profiles,
Hilda and David Pierce. Now this information came out during
the grand jury proceedings. We know that fingernail DNA is
often collected in sexual assault cases as it can be
an indicator of a struggle or defensive wounds. But we
(27:51):
also know that Hilda was close to Pierce that night,
and Michael Ansbach testified that the two have been making
out earlier in the night at the warehouse party. Doctor Miller,
what are your thoughts about Pierce's DNA being found underneath
hild His fingernails and what does that tell us?
Speaker 5 (28:09):
Well, the numbers tell me that they've identified his DNA
for certain on the left and right fingernails. They know
that's his DNA, So that's one thing. The second thing
is that you know, when you're having close intimate contact
with somebody, there can be things like massaging. There can
be things like light scratching and things of that nature
(28:31):
that could get DNA into those places. You know, you
could lick someone's finger, for example, and you know you
would get a significant amount of your saliva and DNA
underneath their fingernails. You could penetrate a woman's vagina, for example,
and get an enormous amount of her DNA underneath your fingernails.
(28:53):
So there are other ways to get DNA underneath your fingernails.
But one of them is scratching. One of them is
that you could have a struggle and you could scratch somebody,
and so that's what they're looking for. They're you know,
they're looking to make sure to confirm that his DNA
(29:13):
is on her body. So we don't know for sure
how the DNA got underneath her fingernails. That's all speculation.
Scratching and certainly some sort of physical interaction happened between them,
but we don't know that that happened during a non
consensual act or anything that was violent, or she was
(29:34):
protecting herself. That's all speculation. Although those are all good
ways to get DNA underneath the fingernails, There are lots
of ways and reasons. Although you know, it does require
some sort of touching and that kind of thing. The
other thing that comes into consideration is the length of
the fingernails, just because your fingertips and the edge of
(29:59):
your fingernails can touch somebody better than if you have
really long fingernails, and so it's a little different to
get your DNA underneath someone's fingernails if they're long than
if they're short. And so we don't know for sure
(30:21):
what happened when DNA's underneath the fingernails, but it does
tell us that there's DNA there, you can identify the person,
and everything else becomes speculation.
Speaker 1 (30:32):
How common are injuries like abrasions to the vagina and
abdomen in sexual assault cases.
Speaker 5 (30:40):
Well, I think that it's hard to really tell with
sexual assault, and I'm not a medical doctor, and I
don't try to get too much into the injuries and
what they are and what they mean. But I can
tell you this from hearing lots of sexual assault nursing
exams when there's talk and having spoken with many of them,
(31:03):
that you can have no findings whatsoever. And it's very
very common to have no findings even when a sexual
assault has occurred. And any two people that have sex,
there's always going to be at least some micro abrasions
that can be identified. Some people have, you know, rougher
(31:26):
consensual sex than other people. So it's very common to
have no findings in a sexual assault nursing examination even
when a sexual assault has occurred. And it's very common
to have findings in red spots and micro abrasions even
during consensual sexual contact. So those things, unless they're really
(31:53):
obvious and there is some real tears and some serious damage,
you really can't tell whether that's consensual sex or non
consensual sex occurred because of small and light injuries and
redness and small abrasions.
Speaker 1 (32:13):
It's also worth noting that Pierce has not been charged
with sexual assault relating to either Christi or Hilda, regardless
of the DNA results. Josh, If Pierce is in charge
with sexual assault of Christi or Hilda, how does their
DNA results impact the case? Why would the prosecution use
(32:33):
as evidence.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
The significance of the evidence as it relates to any
sexual assault or attempted sexual assault is it's part of
the overall pattern of conduct of peerce. The DA's theory
is not so much that he premeditated these murders, that
(32:56):
he intended to cause their deaths, but that he was
playing with fire, and that over the course of his conduct,
which is demonstrated by all of the prior allegations of
sexual assault, and his conduct on that evening, which included
evidence circumstantially that he was at least attempting to or
(33:17):
perhaps did participate in a sexual assault that evening, and
that the use of drugs was to help him facilitate.
That that this was a tragedy waiting to happen, and
so therefore he can be held responsible for their murders
because this isn't some accident, this isn't some anomaly, this
isn't a one time event that took place in his life.
(33:39):
But he had been playing with this dangerous situation for
so long that it was inevitable that it would end
up with this type of tragedy that we're dealing with
now in the death of these two young women.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
It also makes you wonder about other victims. Many of
the Jane Does in this case weren't able to come
forward until Peers was already arrested. Why was that? Many
describe having memory issues or Peers threatening them after being
assaulted by him. The evidence shows a consistent pattern of behavior,
(34:25):
and many of the experts have described what Peers is
accused of as predatory behavior, and what else can we
learn from this? How do we protect people we love,
our daughters, our wives, our sisters, our best friends from predators,
(34:47):
especially in these types of environments. What can change about
how cases like this are prosecuted. What type of lessons
does this case teach us about consent? What can we
change about empowering women to come forward to tell their story?
(35:09):
How do we make sure that people who prey on
these women are put in jail? How do we make
sure that these women get justice? Before we wrap up
our final pre trial episode, now let's hear from the
families of Christine Hilda again and what kind of impact
this case has had on them. Dusty, what has this
(35:31):
experience been like for you, from the beginning of the
investigation to the arrest, the DA not charging Pearson Osborne
initially and now finally getting to the trial. Can you
take us through what this process has been like.
Speaker 6 (35:49):
I would like to ask for anybody that has any
sympety for us go to our go funding accounts and
help with the travel expenses of us going and staying
the length of the trial. Right now, we are looking
at one complete month and at the same time her
(36:14):
Leslie Wayne, her dad has had a bad accident and
he's been off work and he will be off work
without Lee. And if they would generously give it's all
for Christie's travels, and we would greatly appreciate any sport
(36:34):
or any fundraising idea.
Speaker 1 (36:39):
For our listeners. You can find the link to the
go fundme in the podcast description for this episode or
on our website, Once Upon a Crime in Hollywood dot Com.
Let's also welcome back Yon Silliers, Christie's husband Joan. What
kind of pact has this hat on your life?
Speaker 7 (37:03):
You know, it's obviously she was the love of my life.
I miss her every day and I've kind of since
the beginning of her passing, it kind of felt like
I'd taken like a left turn in in the correct
(37:24):
universal timeline, and I've been living in the twilight zone
pretty much, in a place where she doesn't exist, which
is a much less happy place to be. I think
she was. She was a joy to my life, and
(37:47):
I wish sure, I wish things had obviously not gone
down that road, obviously, but yeah, for myself personally, I
find that in order to get out of my own
head and sort of come to terms with the trauma
about you know, losing losing Christie was. I went traveling
(38:12):
pretty much for a full year. I went all the
way through South America, a bunch of places in Europe,
Southeast Asia. Sort of experiencing new things and seeing new
things and being present with myself was the best way
to sort of process that trauma for myself. But yeah,
(38:33):
throughout that process, I was always in touch with her detectives,
always in touch with her family. Uh, yeah, it's been,
it's been. It's been tough, Messa every.
Speaker 1 (38:42):
Day and now Hill does mother doctor arzola placentia. Do
you have anything else you want to say?
Speaker 5 (38:53):
This is so.
Speaker 8 (38:55):
Uh life changing situation. It will never ever be the
same it was, and nothing, nothing can fill the space
that she left. But I was already felt told you,
(39:15):
Fernanda told you. We prefer to remember like a very
loving person, like a pushing person, you know, to try.
You can do it, You can do it.
Speaker 7 (39:29):
Come on.
Speaker 8 (39:31):
And the light of our lives. For me, I'm I'm
proud of her and I'm always will be proud of
her always. This is a life lession. It will change.
It already has and it's still and it will change
(39:53):
many lives. And we have the ability to to choose
what we have, what we want, sorry to choose I
when I think about it, you know, sometimes when I'm
(40:13):
seeing them the news, I see every day people dies,
but when the people who die is someone near to you,
obviously it's it changed your life, It changed the situation,
it changed everything. And as for my daughter already said,
(40:40):
nothing will bring them back again, nothing but we can
honor their lives, their legacy, living the best we can,
trying to see life in a different way. And for me,
(41:08):
in my opinion, it's something very personal. I was kind
of shocked in a good way over Obviously, this is
a tragedy and and nobody can denize it. And they
were a lot of angels. That's what I'm trying to
(41:29):
say to say, you people that I never ever thought
they were trying to come to us, to help us.
I'm really, really, really thankful, thankful with all of them
in the hospital, I was trying to say thank you
with a big word, thank you to all those who
(41:53):
were kind to us, that understood the situation. They were
so huge, man, there were so kind. Not everybody but
mostly and I have no words to say thank you
the social worker. I told you that doctor. Unfortunately I
(42:14):
can remember her name, but you have no idea how
the impact she had my life. And obviously all the
situation had an impact in my life. I tried to
make it worth you know, because I'm still working with
(42:34):
patients now. I know how it feels to be a
familiar with a patient that is in the hospital, and
I try to have some empathy to these people, you know,
because I've already been over there. And sometimes we just
(42:55):
keep our eyes in bad things like this because we
can deny this is a crime, but we can also
see good things, and good things happened and they are
still happening, and they will happen and we have to
(43:19):
be aware of them. And for me, I am really thankful.
Well I've already told you, and mostly with God, because
he never ever ever left me alone. And I'm sorry
for saying this, but because but I can deny it.
(43:40):
You know, for me, this is so a huge reality
that I can deny it. And I don't know if
we have the right things, but we didn't decide to
that's connect her. I never ever will choose that the
(44:00):
things were so bad for her and for help that
that the doctor said that she has no more cerebral activity.
So she donored her organs and we didn't know what
happened with them. They said that someday will be able
(44:25):
to get in touch with those who received her kidneys
or her liver. They didn't spoke with us anymore. Even
we left the emails the phones. They didn't tell us
what happened with them. And I like to know someday
(44:49):
that we made the right decision to help other people
even this tragedy.
Speaker 1 (44:57):
Thank you for sharing. I know this must be very difficult.
Thank you for sharing your experience with our listeners. I
also want to ask Helda's close friend, Fernanda Kantasani, how
are you and others close to Hilda remembering her.
Speaker 9 (45:19):
I speak for myself, but also I guess I can
say it for my friends. We are and as Martha's
mother say, without her is never the same, even if
we are together with Tomas and we are having a
good time thinking of the funny things we lived with
her and all the beautiful things we memories we'd have
(45:42):
with her. Because we all, of course we decide to
remember her as we knew her and not because what
happened to her and for us, I guess it's hard
to do, but it's two different things. And we decide
to focus on the good memories, on the good things
(46:04):
she left us, and I guess since now for me, everyone,
we are trying to live our lives to honor her,
and to we always, I don't know, with my friends
were always saying like, what would Martha do in this situation?
And we laugh because it's everything like you need you
(46:25):
do every you do it, or you don't do anything.
So it's it's really empowering to think of her like
she made it. She did what she wanted, She went
to LA and she lived the life she wanted. Maybe
it was not for a long time, maybe it ended
(46:47):
in a situation where where every of us got shocked
and it changed the lives of everyone. But yeah, we
try and honor her, not just by gathering with each
(47:09):
other and talking about her and the memories we have,
but also by living our own lives the way she
she would live her own and the way she will
I don't know, wanted us to live our lives. So yes,
for me, it's I keep her with me in my
(47:31):
heart everywhere I go. Because I don't know. I guess
I decide to think that she came to my life
to to give me a lesson in life, to see
life as it is. It's not always beautiful, but you
can choose to see the beautiful things, you know, So
(47:56):
I choose always to remember her as a beautiful person.
So she always was with me and with all her friends.
And yes, I for me, if this didn't happen, I
guess my life would be so different in many ways,
of course, but it's it's been the most difficult thing.
(48:20):
But at the same time, it's I feel really close
to her each time I try to turn the pain
to something beautiful, so because I know this is what
she will do or she wanted me to do so,
and little actions in my day like this made me
(48:42):
feel more close to her each time. So yeah, I
don't know for me, she came to give us a
really hard lesson. But at the same time, I could
say beautiful too, because I don't know. We choose to
see the beautiful things in these horrible situations.
Speaker 1 (49:05):
So what you said is very inspiring. Thank you for
sharing that, and I'm so sorry to hear what you've
gone through, what you continue to go through because of
what happened in life sometimes gives you lessons and some
(49:28):
are harder than others. But thank you for showing some light.
Thank you for sharing that we must turn pain into
something beautiful and know that she will never be forgotten.
And we'll get the last word. To Hilda's sister, Fernanda,
(49:50):
do you have anything you like to add?
Speaker 10 (49:53):
I think it's from my side. I just wanted to
add to Like, I know we already talked about it,
but I think for us, it's very clear that what
happened that night was a crime and everyone involved, not
just first, is responsible for taking the lives of both
my sister and Christie as well we already mentioned besides
(50:14):
like drugging them. If they just had taken them to
the hospital, callin one one, done something to help, things
might have been different. And yeah, like that, the choice
of not doing it was what caused the life of my.
Speaker 9 (50:30):
Sister and Christie.
Speaker 10 (50:32):
And you know, yeah, they were both so young, with
so much ahead of them, dreams, futures, everything was stolen.
And it was also just not their futures that was
taken from us, it was also our future with them too,
and yeah, our lives will he be the same.
Speaker 7 (50:52):
Without my sister.
Speaker 9 (50:54):
Nothing will bring her back.
Speaker 10 (50:56):
But we just want justice.
Speaker 9 (50:58):
We want justice to be brought in this case.
Speaker 1 (51:01):
Our hearts go out to the victims and to the
families and friends and loved ones of Christy, Hilda and
the other women who are bravely testifying in this case.
David Pierce remains innocent of all charges until proven guilty
in a court of law. Brant Osborne is also innocent
(51:26):
until proven guilty in a court of law. The trial
is set for January twenty twenty five. We'll be following
the case and we'll provide an update once it wraps up.
Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a review on
Apple Podcasts. Remember, you can get all of our shows
(51:46):
and information about our other podcasts, including The Hollywood Ripper
and The Ronnie Chason Story, at our website once Upon
a Crime in Hollywood dot Com. I'm Kelly Hymen, and
this is once Upon a Crime in Hollywood Girls' Night
Out
The criminal trial of David Pears and brand Osborne is
scheduled to begin in January twenty twenty five. Peerce was
charged in December twenty twenty one with sexually assaulting four
women and now faces eleven charges, including three additional sexual
assault charges, as well as the murders of Christy Giles
(00:35):
and Hilda Marcella Cabrales Arzola. The District Attorney's office filed
the murder and drug charges before taking the case to
the grand jury, which returned the indictment December fourteenth, twenty
twenty two. The prosecution will be led by Los Angeles
County Deputy District Attorney Catherine Mariano. Pierce will be represented
(00:59):
by a defense team made up of Paul Jeffrey Vall,
Leslie and Boyce, and Jonathan Daniel Evans. Osborne, who was
charged with two counts of accessory to murder after the fact,
has retained Michael Arden as his attorney. Michael Ansbach, the
third man who is with Pierce and Osborne that night,
(01:19):
is cooperating with investigators. Let's bring Back Josh Ritter, criminal
defense attorney and former LA County prosecutor, host of Courtroom
Confidential on YouTube, Josh, Pierce and Osborne are being tried together,
how closely are their charges tied to one another.
Speaker 2 (01:39):
Osborne's charges are independent and they stand by themselves, and
they are linked to the crime against Pierce, but they
don't rise and fall with how the case plays out
against Pierce. In other words, if Pierce is found guilty
only of man and slaughter, Osborne can still be found
(02:03):
guilty of accessory after the fact, and that doesn't change
his exposure or criminal culpability. In fact, there is even
a scenario where they might feel that they have enough
evidence against Osborne for his involvement, but the jurors could
be undecided between murder and manslaughter on Pierce and hang
(02:25):
on those charges and have to retry him again even
though they've convicted Osborne. So not to get too much
into the weeds, but it is an independent charge and
not necessarily married to what happens with Pierce, but it
is based upon the crime that Pierce committed. According to
(02:48):
the DA's office.
Speaker 1 (02:50):
Another interesting point is that the state will combine the
sexual assault and murder charges in one trial. Josh, is
this going to make it easier or more for the
DA's office to prove their case against Peers.
Speaker 2 (03:04):
Again going back to the idea of being able to
prove what was David Pierce's intent and whether or not
this was all some sort of horrific accident. I think
the DA realizes that a built in defense to this
is that tragically, in this country, people die from fentanyl
overdose all the time, and that drugs are laced with
(03:26):
fentanyl even without people realizing that, and they want to
avoid any argument that could be made by the defense
that this was somehow just another tragic overdose and that
David Pierce should not be held accountable. And the way
that they're doing that is showed that this isn't an
anomaly in this man's life, but that this was a
(03:50):
runaway train headed directly for this tragic end, that he
had left a trail of women in his wake where
he had things nightmarishly similar to other women in the past,
and it ended here as everyone might have suspected with
(04:10):
a person with these kind of violent, dangerous proclivities towards women.
And so it's important for them to understand that this
wasn't just a guy having a good time on a
night out in Los Angeles, but this is a man
who had assaulted women in a remarkably similar fashion many
(04:32):
times before, and that he had used drugs to assault them,
and that in this instance, when you play with fire,
eventually something like this is going to happen. And what
ended up happening was the tragic death of Christie and Hilda.
Speaker 1 (04:48):
We don't know who will be testifying until they actually
take the stand, but witnesses who already testified to the
grand jury include actor David Marietta, who could be one
of the key witnesses after Brant Osborne told him about
the knight Christie Hilda were killed, LAPD detective Jonathan Vanderley,
(05:09):
as well as the security guard from the hospital in
Culver City where Christie was dropped off. There were also
seven Jane Does who testified to the grand jury. Prosecutors
tell Once Upon a Crime in Hollywood that more victims
are expected to testify. The charges against Pierce include three
(05:29):
separate counts of forcible rape, one count each of sonomy
by YUSUF force and rape of unconscious or asleep person,
and two counts of sexual penetration by USU force. Let's
bring back Trinka Perata, retired narcotics detective after twenty five
(05:51):
years with the Los Angeles Police Department. Now president of
the Project GHB Board and a renowned experts on drug
facilitated sexual assaults. Trinka, you've investigated a number of sexual predators.
What does the timeline of Pierce's charges tell you and
(06:13):
the pattern of very similar accusations dating back to two
thousand and seven.
Speaker 3 (06:21):
Well, the whole history of this guy again, you've got
You've got cases that we'll probably never hear about, people
that have gone on in their lives and may not
even have come forward now. But it sounds like an
escalation and certainly a long term pattern of the headed
to where it ended, unfortunately tragically. It's it's important to
(06:48):
document all that they can. Judges may or may not
allow some of the prior prior cases. A lot of
times we aren't allowed to introduce prior activity even though
it's clearly relevant and it follows the same pattern. But
I think it's important when when judges do allow it,
it's important to show the growth of the person's conduct
(07:11):
that resulted then, in this case, to death. That makes
him a pretty heartless serial predator. So I'm not surprised
at his string of cases and I'm sure there's more,
and it appears to be an escalation of them where
he's involved other people knowing what was going on, other
(07:32):
people involved in helping cover it up, and I think
that shows a growing pattern of misconduct and criminality. So
hopefully that will be well documented and well entered and allowed,
so no surprise in the In the long term, it's
(07:53):
just so tragic that it took so long to really
nail this guy down and stop his spree.
Speaker 1 (08:04):
Now, let's not forget Pierce is also facing two felony
drug charges for providing controlled substance fetanyl. We do know
he met Christy and Hilda at the warehouse party, and
multiple witness told police they observed Peers giving both women cocaine,
including Ansbach, who was with them. During his testimony, Ansboch
(08:29):
also revealed the women had their own supply of kennemine,
and we know from Christie and Hilda's friend Dohee that
they had also done cocaine earlier in the evening at
the art gallery. That could be challenging for the prosecution
to prove the drugs Peers gave them were the ones
that caused their death, not their own drugs, and that
(08:52):
Pierce did so knowingly, Josh, will that be difficult for
the day to prove.
Speaker 2 (09:00):
The defense is obviously going to focus much of their
attention on the idea that Christy and Hilda were willingly
taking drugs themselves that evening. This is not an instance
of where somebody slipped something into their drink at a
bar unaware to them they were taking cocaine. They had
(09:21):
apparently been a possession of their own narcotics, that they
were willingly taking that evening. There's even evidence that their
text communications between the two of them talking about consuming drugs,
and the defense is going to, I imagine, spend a
large part of their attention and time focusing on how
(09:42):
they were taking drugs. They were taking drugs from different sources.
They may have been handed drugs by different individuals other
than David Pierce that evening, and that unfortunately, we live
in a time where sometimes you can just get a
hot dose and that means that a person ends up
dead and it had nothing to do with David Piers.
(10:03):
And that is why his history is so important and
bringing in these other assaults from even years ago where
he had deployed women with drugs is so important to
understand that no, this was no accident. The trouble only
arose after they met David Pierce, and only after they
(10:27):
made the tragic decision to go back to his apartment
and he started to give them further drugs, and he
started to give them cocktails mixed likely with other narcotics
that were I think we can all assume the prosecution's argument,
who's going to be those narcotics were intended to render
(10:49):
them unconscious so that he could sexually assault them, And
even his behavior afterwards, realizing that the drugs were something
that he needed to cover up up, all of that
becomes so much more important, and it's not going to
be a small task for the prosecution. It will be
an undertaking to convince jurors beyond a reasonable doubt that know,
(11:12):
this is not a tragic accident, that know, the drugs
that killed these two women did not come from a
different source, but that it is this man, based upon
what we know about him, based upon his history, based
upon his conduct that evening that led to their deaths.
Speaker 1 (11:29):
Actions speak louder than words. And one of the things
that could potentially be an issue is when once the
girls will start experiencing issues Why wasn't nine to one
one called? Why weren't they immediately taken to the hospital.
We know both women were conscious at five point forty
(11:50):
am from ansbox cell phone video, just minutes after they
shared text about wanting to leave the apartment. We know
after that an uber show up but didn't pick up
the girls, and they spent the next eleven hours inside
the apartment, during which neighbors heard a woman screaming in
pain and moaning on and off during the hours of
(12:13):
ten to thirty am two four pm. From that point,
Pears and Osborne's actions could play a central role in
the trial. Both men were allegedly seen on surveillance footage
carrying Christy and Hilda's body to the car. They were
also seen covering their faces, and hospital staff also confirmed
(12:34):
that mass men had dropped off the girls in the
car with license plates removed Josh. From a legal perspective,
how does removing the license plates and covering up their
faces reflect on the suspects.
Speaker 2 (12:49):
A large part of the prosecution's case is going to
be about what we call consciousness of guilt evidence, meaning
everything that the defendants did afterwards that show that they
knew what they had done, was something wrong that they
had a consciousness of their own guilt and we were
(13:09):
trying to cover up their steps. Had this been a
tragic overdose, anyone would expect them to call nine point
one at the first sign of trouble and try to
get assistance for these women and try to get them
to a hospital as quickly as they can and try
to save their lives. But instead of doing that, David
(13:30):
Pierce took steps specifically to protect himself and therefore likely
cause these women to die by his failure to act
quickly and buy his attempts to cover up what he
had done. And what I'm talking about specifically is driving
them to two separate hospitals at different times, with a
(13:53):
car that did not have a license plate, covering their
faces with masks. All of this is so that they
are not At no point are they taking any steps
to save these women. At no point does it appear
as though they cared about the lives of these two women. Instead,
(14:13):
David Pierce cared only about himself and trying to evade capture,
and that consciousness of guilt evidence will play a significant
role in this trial.
Speaker 1 (14:25):
There is also evidence that Pearce and Osborne went even
further than that to cover their tracks, allegedly coming up
with the story that the girls wandered onto their property,
keeping and destroying hill to cell phone and searching for
non extradition countries or places to disappear. According to the LAPD,
(14:49):
one potential tricky aspect of the trial will be reviewing
the autopsies and making sense of the toxicology results for
both women, which showed rugs in their system and some
evidence of what could be interpreted as foul play. Going
back to doctor j Vargas, Associate professor at California State
(15:12):
University in Los Angeles, doctor, you reviewed both autopsies. How
can the autopsy and the toxicology results help or hurt
the investigation into whether or not David Piers is responsible
for the deaths of Christine and Hilda.
Speaker 4 (15:29):
So I am not I'm not a lawyer. Of course,
I am not a legal expert. But my sort of
view of this case is that, And then again, I
don't have I'm not privy to all of the sort
of I guess all the testimony that may have already
(15:49):
been given on observing these two women that evening ingesting
drugs that sounded like, to me, the way I had,
the experts that I did read said that there was
observations of them, you know, recreationally using drugs at these
(16:10):
at the bar or maybe this rave that they went to.
So there's so that's a point in time where you know,
drugs and a drug laced with fensannel in my opinion,
could have been administered at that point. And then certainly
later on when these two women are at this individual's residence,
(16:30):
that of course is another point in time for sort
of the drugs to be administered. So either way, what
will be most difficult in this case is like motive,
Like you know, were intent is somebody is somebody intending
to kill these individuals knowingly or if it was you know,
(16:53):
sort of involuntary right, And so to me, in this case,
I feel like what will likely be an outcome would
be something like involuntary manslaughter. I mean, I think they're certainly,
they're certainly liable for what happened. If especially if they're
providing drugs for the for these two women, and you know,
(17:17):
if they knew that the drugs RELASD with fencanyl and
that was something that they were going for, then I
think you know, it's possible to even get to like
a second degree murder charge, but it's more likely to
me that they probably didn't understand and they didn't really
know that the drugs released with fencanyl, And so that
(17:38):
to me would be something that would be harder for
someone to prove. I guess would be we knew that
drugs had fencanyl in it. I mean that would go
one way. If they didn't know that their drugs that
they were abusing had fencanyl, then I think it could
go you know, another way.
Speaker 1 (17:55):
How big of a factor is time when it comes
to cases like this and in cases of an overdose.
Speaker 4 (18:03):
If we sort of assume that, you know, fencanyl was
the main driver here. Fencanyl is an extremely potent opioid medication.
It's it's used primarily for you know, people with extreme pain.
And the fact that it's been now produced globally and
(18:25):
it's manufacturer clandestinely sort of produced and brought into the
country various ways and then finding its way into all
sorts of drugs. It's it's on set, it's going to
it's going to happen within you know, once it's ingested.
And again this all it really has to do with
(18:46):
with dose, right, I mean, if small amounts might be
tolerated longer, but you know, if a large amount a
fencanyl comes on board, you would imagine that somebody would
be succumbing to the effects of that and then you know,
pretty quickly would start to you know, fentanyl does have
a rapid onset. It's supposed to write it's a it's
a medication used for pain management and particularly chronic you know,
(19:11):
cancer pain, like really excruciating pain. So this drug is
going to work relatively quickly, and then if too much
is on board, then then that that sort of drug
effect that you know somebody might be going for, that's
going to sort of dissipate and then go towards this
(19:32):
it's it's basically respiratory depression. So that's what ends up
killing people when they have too much of the opioid
on board, the fentanyl, and and so again it's hard
to really put a timeline on it. You know, you know,
it's possible she both of these women could have been
taking if they were getting them maybe from the same person,
(19:54):
all night. It's possible that they sort of may have
been building up this this drug level at the same time.
It's possible that maybe they both got it the largest
dose later on in the night. It's hard to really
put that timing on it, but what is for sure
is that once these observations of labored, shallow breathing and
(20:20):
the person's sort of you know, incapacitated that point, you
really just need that person to get assistance right away.
And of course, you know, we need to breathe to live,
and so if breathing gets to the point where obviously
we're not going to be able to have a great
outcome for those individuals, and so you know, waiting around,
(20:44):
driving them around, dropping them off at hospitals and stuff
like that was just not obviously going to be, in
my opinion, the best outcome because of the time it's passing,
and it's very unfortunate, and I I just just think like,
what could have happened if if these individuals just you know,
(21:06):
saw that you know, hey, this didn't work out the
way we wanted. You know, obviously they're they're sort of
predatory and they're trying to take advantage of these of
these two women, but you know, at some point they
must have realized that they had something is wrong here.
If they just would have you know, called you know,
nine to one one and you know it is it is,
(21:28):
it is possible that they could have survived if they
got sort of an intervention of Melock zone or narcam and.
Speaker 1 (21:37):
The grand jury proceedings, the prosecution also went through the
results of the SART sexual assault exams performed on both
Christy and Hilda, as well as Jane Doe one and five.
Robert Broderick, a criminal list with LAPD who tested the
sexual assault kit performed on Christy. Giles said male DNA
(21:59):
was on the vaginal swabs, external genitilia, neck, breast, and
inner thighs. The mix contained too much female DNA. So
why STR testing was done? Let's welcome doctor Monty Miller,
director of forensic DNA Experts and a specialist in sexual
(22:21):
assaults and murder investigations. Doctor, what is why STR testing
and why was it done in this case?
Speaker 5 (22:32):
So typically, you know, they use what's called autosomal DNA testing,
and you know, everybody has forty six chromosomes and this
particular test, the autosomal DNA testing, attempts to collect information
from most of those chromosomes and so you get a
(22:53):
wide variety of information. You have approximately fifty data points
that you can calculate, and it's very informative and it's
very specific. The YSTR testing allows them to look for
male DNA when there's a lot of female DNA. So
if you have about inside the vagina, for example, there's
(23:16):
an enormous amount of female DNA, and sometimes it's just
hard to find the male DNA. It's like a drop
of blue paint in a bucket of pink paint. You
just don't see that one drop. So the YSTR testing
allows us to look just for that blue drop, just
for the male DNA. And it's not as specific to
(23:37):
single individuals, but it does allow us to find a
family male tree that the DNA came from, and it
does help us identify people when there's a lot of
female DNA and very little male DNA.
Speaker 1 (23:53):
The blood was taken from Piers, Osborne and Ansbach then
test it against the DNA evidence found on Christie for
a potential match. Roderick said when the results came back,
the DNA from samples from the inner thigh and external
genitilia matched the profile of David Pearce and excluded Osborne
(24:15):
and Annsbach, Doctor Miller, what can you tell us about
the mix of Pearce's DNA found in the samples from
Christie's sexual assault exam?
Speaker 5 (24:27):
Overall, it's clear that his DNA is present in and
on Christie Giles, in and around her you know, vagina
and other areas. There's an indication that that that might
be semen, though that wasn't confirmed. On Hilda Cabrals, you know,
(24:51):
his DNA is found on both her left and right fingernails.
There's male DNA on Christy Giles on her vaginal sample,
anal sample, external sample, neck breasts, and inner thighs. There
is DNA from David Pierce in Jane Doe's vagina Jane
(25:13):
Do number five. There is DNA from David Pierce on
Jane Doe's face and neck. And so we know his
DNA overall is on all of these women, and with
the exception of Jane Doe number one, well and even
Hilda Marcella. It's on Jane Do number one and Hilda Marcella,
(25:37):
it's not in an intimate region, whereas on Christy Giles
and Jane Doe number five it's clearly in an intimate region.
So he's had some interaction with all of these people,
and that much is known, and that much is clear,
But none of this really establishes that he killed and
(25:59):
he or did anything else. He could have simply had
sex with the Christy Giles and had some you know,
physical interaction with Hilda, Marcella, Jane Doe number five. You know,
it looks like he probably had sex with her and
Jane do number one. His DNAs are on her face
(26:21):
and next. So overall he's been in contact with these women.
But this in and of itself doesn't tell the story.
It just places him in places and taking actions that
are clear and unmistakable in some cases, but it really
doesn't tell us the context of those things.
Speaker 1 (26:43):
But that wasn't all. A sexual assault exam was also
performed on Hilda while she was still in hospital, though
it wasn't done until three days after she was dropped off.
On November sixteenth, Carolyn Clark, another criminalist with the LA Count,
found a small, approximately five millimeter abrasion in Hilda's vagina,
(27:06):
as well as another small abrasion to her lower abdomen.
For Hilda, only fingernail swabs provided enough DNA for analysis. Now,
this could be due to the extensive cleaning procedures that
she underwent during her time in the hospital, and thus
the only DNA that was available were in her fingernails.
(27:28):
The DNA mixture found underneath both Hilda's fingernails matched two profiles,
Hilda and David Pierce. Now this information came out during
the grand jury proceedings. We know that fingernail DNA is
often collected in sexual assault cases as it can be
an indicator of a struggle or defensive wounds. But we
(27:51):
also know that Hilda was close to Pierce that night,
and Michael Ansbach testified that the two have been making
out earlier in the night at the warehouse party. Doctor Miller,
what are your thoughts about Pierce's DNA being found underneath
hild His fingernails and what does that tell us?
Speaker 5 (28:09):
Well, the numbers tell me that they've identified his DNA
for certain on the left and right fingernails. They know
that's his DNA, So that's one thing. The second thing
is that you know, when you're having close intimate contact
with somebody, there can be things like massaging. There can
be things like light scratching and things of that nature
(28:31):
that could get DNA into those places. You know, you
could lick someone's finger, for example, and you know you
would get a significant amount of your saliva and DNA
underneath their fingernails. You could penetrate a woman's vagina, for example,
and get an enormous amount of her DNA underneath your fingernails.
(28:53):
So there are other ways to get DNA underneath your fingernails.
But one of them is scratching. One of them is
that you could have a struggle and you could scratch somebody,
and so that's what they're looking for. They're you know,
they're looking to make sure to confirm that his DNA
(29:13):
is on her body. So we don't know for sure
how the DNA got underneath her fingernails. That's all speculation.
Scratching and certainly some sort of physical interaction happened between them,
but we don't know that that happened during a non
consensual act or anything that was violent, or she was
(29:34):
protecting herself. That's all speculation. Although those are all good
ways to get DNA underneath the fingernails, There are lots
of ways and reasons. Although you know, it does require
some sort of touching and that kind of thing. The
other thing that comes into consideration is the length of
the fingernails, just because your fingertips and the edge of
(29:59):
your fingernails can touch somebody better than if you have
really long fingernails, and so it's a little different to
get your DNA underneath someone's fingernails if they're long than
if they're short. And so we don't know for sure
(30:21):
what happened when DNA's underneath the fingernails, but it does
tell us that there's DNA there, you can identify the person,
and everything else becomes speculation.
Speaker 1 (30:32):
How common are injuries like abrasions to the vagina and
abdomen in sexual assault cases.
Speaker 5 (30:40):
Well, I think that it's hard to really tell with
sexual assault, and I'm not a medical doctor, and I
don't try to get too much into the injuries and
what they are and what they mean. But I can
tell you this from hearing lots of sexual assault nursing
exams when there's talk and having spoken with many of them,
(31:03):
that you can have no findings whatsoever. And it's very
very common to have no findings even when a sexual
assault has occurred. And any two people that have sex,
there's always going to be at least some micro abrasions
that can be identified. Some people have, you know, rougher
(31:26):
consensual sex than other people. So it's very common to
have no findings in a sexual assault nursing examination even
when a sexual assault has occurred. And it's very common
to have findings in red spots and micro abrasions even
during consensual sexual contact. So those things, unless they're really
(31:53):
obvious and there is some real tears and some serious damage,
you really can't tell whether that's consensual sex or non
consensual sex occurred because of small and light injuries and
redness and small abrasions.
Speaker 1 (32:13):
It's also worth noting that Pierce has not been charged
with sexual assault relating to either Christi or Hilda, regardless
of the DNA results. Josh, If Pierce is in charge
with sexual assault of Christi or Hilda, how does their
DNA results impact the case? Why would the prosecution use
(32:33):
as evidence.
Speaker 2 (32:35):
The significance of the evidence as it relates to any
sexual assault or attempted sexual assault is it's part of
the overall pattern of conduct of peerce. The DA's theory
is not so much that he premeditated these murders, that
(32:56):
he intended to cause their deaths, but that he was
playing with fire, and that over the course of his conduct,
which is demonstrated by all of the prior allegations of
sexual assault, and his conduct on that evening, which included
evidence circumstantially that he was at least attempting to or
(33:17):
perhaps did participate in a sexual assault that evening, and
that the use of drugs was to help him facilitate.
That that this was a tragedy waiting to happen, and
so therefore he can be held responsible for their murders
because this isn't some accident, this isn't some anomaly, this
isn't a one time event that took place in his life.
(33:39):
But he had been playing with this dangerous situation for
so long that it was inevitable that it would end
up with this type of tragedy that we're dealing with
now in the death of these two young women.
Speaker 1 (33:57):
It also makes you wonder about other victims. Many of
the Jane Does in this case weren't able to come
forward until Peers was already arrested. Why was that? Many
describe having memory issues or Peers threatening them after being
assaulted by him. The evidence shows a consistent pattern of behavior,
(34:25):
and many of the experts have described what Peers is
accused of as predatory behavior, and what else can we
learn from this? How do we protect people we love,
our daughters, our wives, our sisters, our best friends from predators,
(34:47):
especially in these types of environments. What can change about
how cases like this are prosecuted. What type of lessons
does this case teach us about consent? What can we
change about empowering women to come forward to tell their story?
(35:09):
How do we make sure that people who prey on
these women are put in jail? How do we make
sure that these women get justice? Before we wrap up
our final pre trial episode, now let's hear from the
families of Christine Hilda again and what kind of impact
this case has had on them. Dusty, what has this
(35:31):
experience been like for you, from the beginning of the
investigation to the arrest, the DA not charging Pearson Osborne
initially and now finally getting to the trial. Can you
take us through what this process has been like.
Speaker 6 (35:49):
I would like to ask for anybody that has any
sympety for us go to our go funding accounts and
help with the travel expenses of us going and staying
the length of the trial. Right now, we are looking
at one complete month and at the same time her
(36:14):
Leslie Wayne, her dad has had a bad accident and
he's been off work and he will be off work
without Lee. And if they would generously give it's all
for Christie's travels, and we would greatly appreciate any sport
(36:34):
or any fundraising idea.
Speaker 1 (36:39):
For our listeners. You can find the link to the
go fundme in the podcast description for this episode or
on our website, Once Upon a Crime in Hollywood dot Com.
Let's also welcome back Yon Silliers, Christie's husband Joan. What
kind of pact has this hat on your life?
Speaker 7 (37:03):
You know, it's obviously she was the love of my life.
I miss her every day and I've kind of since
the beginning of her passing, it kind of felt like
I'd taken like a left turn in in the correct
(37:24):
universal timeline, and I've been living in the twilight zone
pretty much, in a place where she doesn't exist, which
is a much less happy place to be. I think
she was. She was a joy to my life, and
(37:47):
I wish sure, I wish things had obviously not gone
down that road, obviously, but yeah, for myself personally, I
find that in order to get out of my own
head and sort of come to terms with the trauma
about you know, losing losing Christie was. I went traveling
(38:12):
pretty much for a full year. I went all the
way through South America, a bunch of places in Europe,
Southeast Asia. Sort of experiencing new things and seeing new
things and being present with myself was the best way
to sort of process that trauma for myself. But yeah,
(38:33):
throughout that process, I was always in touch with her detectives,
always in touch with her family. Uh, yeah, it's been,
it's been. It's been tough, Messa every.
Speaker 1 (38:42):
Day and now Hill does mother doctor arzola placentia. Do
you have anything else you want to say?
Speaker 5 (38:53):
This is so.
Speaker 8 (38:55):
Uh life changing situation. It will never ever be the
same it was, and nothing, nothing can fill the space
that she left. But I was already felt told you,
(39:15):
Fernanda told you. We prefer to remember like a very
loving person, like a pushing person, you know, to try.
You can do it, You can do it.
Speaker 7 (39:29):
Come on.
Speaker 8 (39:31):
And the light of our lives. For me, I'm I'm
proud of her and I'm always will be proud of
her always. This is a life lession. It will change.
It already has and it's still and it will change
(39:53):
many lives. And we have the ability to to choose
what we have, what we want, sorry to choose I
when I think about it, you know, sometimes when I'm
(40:13):
seeing them the news, I see every day people dies,
but when the people who die is someone near to you,
obviously it's it changed your life, It changed the situation,
it changed everything. And as for my daughter already said,
(40:40):
nothing will bring them back again, nothing but we can
honor their lives, their legacy, living the best we can,
trying to see life in a different way. And for me,
(41:08):
in my opinion, it's something very personal. I was kind
of shocked in a good way over Obviously, this is
a tragedy and and nobody can denize it. And they
were a lot of angels. That's what I'm trying to
(41:29):
say to say, you people that I never ever thought
they were trying to come to us, to help us.
I'm really, really, really thankful, thankful with all of them
in the hospital, I was trying to say thank you
with a big word, thank you to all those who
(41:53):
were kind to us, that understood the situation. They were
so huge, man, there were so kind. Not everybody but
mostly and I have no words to say thank you
the social worker. I told you that doctor. Unfortunately I
(42:14):
can remember her name, but you have no idea how
the impact she had my life. And obviously all the
situation had an impact in my life. I tried to
make it worth you know, because I'm still working with
(42:34):
patients now. I know how it feels to be a
familiar with a patient that is in the hospital, and
I try to have some empathy to these people, you know,
because I've already been over there. And sometimes we just
(42:55):
keep our eyes in bad things like this because we
can deny this is a crime, but we can also
see good things, and good things happened and they are
still happening, and they will happen and we have to
(43:19):
be aware of them. And for me, I am really thankful.
Well I've already told you, and mostly with God, because
he never ever ever left me alone. And I'm sorry
for saying this, but because but I can deny it.
(43:40):
You know, for me, this is so a huge reality
that I can deny it. And I don't know if
we have the right things, but we didn't decide to
that's connect her. I never ever will choose that the
(44:00):
things were so bad for her and for help that
that the doctor said that she has no more cerebral activity.
So she donored her organs and we didn't know what
happened with them. They said that someday will be able
(44:25):
to get in touch with those who received her kidneys
or her liver. They didn't spoke with us anymore. Even
we left the emails the phones. They didn't tell us
what happened with them. And I like to know someday
(44:49):
that we made the right decision to help other people
even this tragedy.
Speaker 1 (44:57):
Thank you for sharing. I know this must be very difficult.
Thank you for sharing your experience with our listeners. I
also want to ask Helda's close friend, Fernanda Kantasani, how
are you and others close to Hilda remembering her.
Speaker 9 (45:19):
I speak for myself, but also I guess I can
say it for my friends. We are and as Martha's
mother say, without her is never the same, even if
we are together with Tomas and we are having a
good time thinking of the funny things we lived with
her and all the beautiful things we memories we'd have
(45:42):
with her. Because we all, of course we decide to
remember her as we knew her and not because what
happened to her and for us, I guess it's hard
to do, but it's two different things. And we decide
to focus on the good memories, on the good things
(46:04):
she left us, and I guess since now for me, everyone,
we are trying to live our lives to honor her,
and to we always, I don't know, with my friends
were always saying like, what would Martha do in this situation?
And we laugh because it's everything like you need you
(46:25):
do every you do it, or you don't do anything.
So it's it's really empowering to think of her like
she made it. She did what she wanted, She went
to LA and she lived the life she wanted. Maybe
it was not for a long time, maybe it ended
(46:47):
in a situation where where every of us got shocked
and it changed the lives of everyone. But yeah, we
try and honor her, not just by gathering with each
(47:09):
other and talking about her and the memories we have,
but also by living our own lives the way she
she would live her own and the way she will
I don't know, wanted us to live our lives. So yes,
for me, it's I keep her with me in my
(47:31):
heart everywhere I go. Because I don't know. I guess
I decide to think that she came to my life
to to give me a lesson in life, to see
life as it is. It's not always beautiful, but you
can choose to see the beautiful things, you know, So
(47:56):
I choose always to remember her as a beautiful person.
So she always was with me and with all her friends.
And yes, I for me, if this didn't happen, I
guess my life would be so different in many ways,
of course, but it's it's been the most difficult thing.
(48:20):
But at the same time, it's I feel really close
to her each time I try to turn the pain
to something beautiful, so because I know this is what
she will do or she wanted me to do so,
and little actions in my day like this made me
(48:42):
feel more close to her each time. So yeah, I
don't know for me, she came to give us a
really hard lesson. But at the same time, I could
say beautiful too, because I don't know. We choose to
see the beautiful things in these horrible situations.
Speaker 1 (49:05):
So what you said is very inspiring. Thank you for
sharing that, and I'm so sorry to hear what you've
gone through, what you continue to go through because of
what happened in life sometimes gives you lessons and some
(49:28):
are harder than others. But thank you for showing some light.
Thank you for sharing that we must turn pain into
something beautiful and know that she will never be forgotten.
And we'll get the last word. To Hilda's sister, Fernanda,
(49:50):
do you have anything you like to add?
Speaker 10 (49:53):
I think it's from my side. I just wanted to
add to Like, I know we already talked about it,
but I think for us, it's very clear that what
happened that night was a crime and everyone involved, not
just first, is responsible for taking the lives of both
my sister and Christie as well we already mentioned besides
(50:14):
like drugging them. If they just had taken them to
the hospital, callin one one, done something to help, things
might have been different. And yeah, like that, the choice
of not doing it was what caused the life of my.
Speaker 9 (50:30):
Sister and Christie.
Speaker 10 (50:32):
And you know, yeah, they were both so young, with
so much ahead of them, dreams, futures, everything was stolen.
And it was also just not their futures that was
taken from us, it was also our future with them too,
and yeah, our lives will he be the same.
Speaker 7 (50:52):
Without my sister.
Speaker 9 (50:54):
Nothing will bring her back.
Speaker 10 (50:56):
But we just want justice.
Speaker 9 (50:58):
We want justice to be brought in this case.
Speaker 1 (51:01):
Our hearts go out to the victims and to the
families and friends and loved ones of Christy, Hilda and
the other women who are bravely testifying in this case.
David Pierce remains innocent of all charges until proven guilty
in a court of law. Brant Osborne is also innocent
(51:26):
until proven guilty in a court of law. The trial
is set for January twenty twenty five. We'll be following
the case and we'll provide an update once it wraps up.
Don't forget to subscribe and leave us a review on
Apple Podcasts. Remember, you can get all of our shows
(51:46):
and information about our other podcasts, including The Hollywood Ripper
and The Ronnie Chason Story, at our website once Upon
a Crime in Hollywood dot Com. I'm Kelly Hymen, and
this is once Upon a Crime in Hollywood Girls' Night
Out
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!