1.Christopher Corbitt — Cross (Continued)/Redirect/Recross (Recall 1)
982 linesPROCEEDINGS
(Proceedings continued from volume VII as follows:)
JUDGE HANKINSON: we're here in State of Florida versus Garcia and Magbanua. Let the record reflect the defendants are present with their attorneys.
I think when we broke yesterday, I raised with you what had been reported about an alleged violation of the rule of sequestration. What did we determine from that, Ms. Cappleman?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: That Ms. Johnson, Erika Johnson, was watching the live feed of Ms. Lebredo's testimony before she testified.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And did Ms. Johnson provide any previous statements?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes. She was deposed.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And has she given a statement before that?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Yes, sir, to law enforcement.
JUDGE HANKINSON: TI beg your pardon?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: To law enforcement, she did. Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: So there was a law enforcement statement and a prior deposition?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Correct.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. All right. You have any proposal what we do?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Garcia?
MR. ZANGENEH: Good morning, Your Honor.
Mr. Garcia is not seeking any action.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Magbanua?
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, if I could have one brief moment?
(A pause in the proceeding.)
MR. DECOSTE: Sorry, Your Honor. Two seconds.
(A pause in the proceeding.)
MR. DECOSTE: No position.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. well, nobody's seeking any action on it, so I guess it just happened and we'll move on. I reminded everybody to tell their witnesses they're under the rule of sequestration, so hopefully everyone has done that.
we have other issues we need to take up?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Nothing from the State.
MR. ZANGENEH: Nothing from Mr. Garcia, Judge.
MR. DECOSTE: Nothing from Ms. Magbanua, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's go back to the discovery issue that I've not ruled upon relating to the traffic ticket of Mr. Garcia, State's Exhibit 122. Anybody have anything new they wanted to say on that or -- I'm prepared to make a ruling, but if somebody has something further, I'll listen to you.
MS. CAPPLEMAN: Nothing further from the State.
MR. ZANGENEH: Nothing further from Mr. Garcia.
JUDGE HANKINSON: What sanction are you seeking, Mr. Zangeneh?
MR. ZANGENEH: Exclusion of the citation or mention of the citation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. Mr. DeCoste?
MR. DECOSTE: Same, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. All right. I'm going to deny the request to exclude State's Exhibit 122. we've had a Richardson inquiry. I'll make my findings.
The first finding is whether it was willful or inadvertent. I don't find there was a willful violation. It probably is sloppy work, but I don't find that there was a willful intent to hide evidence as asserted by the defense. As supported, the piece of evidence is listed on the evidence list that the State provided before trial in which it lists Garcia speeding ticket -- or Garcia ticket, obviously not trying to hide it.
It cannot be established at this point in time exactly when the document was actually provided to the defense. I accept the defense assertions that they had not actually seen the document until they received the information provided from Sergeant Corbitt. But the document that would have contained that information was provided to the defense September 16th.
The State received it on September 10th. Six days may be a little longer than should be but not an unreasonable amount of time. The Court invited everybody to look at the evidence back at the beginning of the trial. I accept the prosecutor's assertions that this ticket was included in those matters, so I don't find a willful violation.
Was it substantial or trivial? I don't -- I think there has to be some spectrum in between substantial or trivial. I don't find it substantial. I don't find it trivial. It's somewhere in between. It is an item of evidence that I'm sure the State would make some argument from, so I certainly can't say it's trivial. At the same time, whether somebody got a speeding ticket, I don't -- I can't say is substantial.
And the final issue is whether it had a prejudicial effect on the parties’ trial preparation. I don't find that to be the case. I accept defense counsels’ assertions that they thoroughly investigated this case. I understand that and appreciate that. But as with the other ticket, ultimately, what you have is a speeding ticket. I think it's a speeding ticket -- traffic ticket of some sort.
It's highly unlikely that five years after the fact anything in the way of collateral evidence is going to be gathered as to a traffic ticket. whether the officer would remember this particular ticket beyond what's written in the ticket is highly unlikely; highly unlikely there's any other collateral information available. So ultimately what you have is a piece of paper that shows that on a relevant date, Mr. Garcia got a traffic ticket driving a vehicle that is of relevance. The document speaks for itself, and I don't think it would have been any different had it been disclosed two months ago versus the way in which it was disclosed.
I do, to be clear, say there was a discovery violation, but those are my findings, particularly as to Mr. Garcia. He's probably the one with the most knowledge of this item. He's the one that received the ticket, so he probably has more recollection than anyone else about the circumstances of that. Certainly as to Mr. Garcia, there's even a lessened prejudice.
Does that leave anything outstanding?
MS. CAPPLEMAN: No, sir.
MR. ZANGENEH: NO, Your Honor.
MR. DECOSTE: No, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Let's start with the jury at 9:00 o'clock.
(A recess in the proceeding.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's have the jury, please.
(Jury enters.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Good morning, folks. Thank you for being back here on time this morning.
You may proceed, Mr. DeCoste.
MR. DECOSTE: Thank you, Your Honor.
whereupon, CHRIS CORBITT was recalled as a witness, having been previously duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: CONTINUED CROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Good morning, Sergeant.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Good morning.
MR. DECOSTE: Welcome back. I have about five more minutes’ worth of questions for you.
You remember yesterday afternoon we had the easels and we were using them as towers.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct. Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: we talked about if a tower goes down, but we didn't ~talk about traffic on a tower.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. So we had tower A and we had tower B and how if -- excuse me, how if tower A were to go down, that that doesn't mean that there wouldn't be cell phone reception, that the range of tower B could pick up somebody who's in the vicinity of tower A; right?
MR. DECOSTE: Now, more specifically on that, it doesn't have to be that the whole tower goes down. One of the tower's sectors could go down; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That is possible.
MR. DECOSTE: So most of the towers that we're dealing with on this case, they have three sectors, right, most of the Miami towers?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Most of them do, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So if one of those three sectors goes down, a caller could be either routed or "kicked" is the word; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Whatever. However. Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: what's your word?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I guess "kicked" would be fine.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. So it gets kicked to another sector.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: So they could actually be on the south side of a tower, but they're showing up using the north side sector.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No. I don't -- in that situation, the sectors are directional, as we talked about. They're oriented in a very specific direction. And if you're very, very close to the tower, then there's a chance that you could communicate with a sector that's facing the opposite direction. As you move away from the tower, that energy is radiating out in the opposite direction that you are so your handset's not going to reach around and talk to it.
But what you have is within a mile or a mile anda half, there's probably four in that -- the density of cell sites in south Florida is very high. There's going to be another cell site over here or back here or back there that is going to have a sector oriented where you are, and that is the sector your handset would communicate with.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, when you're talking about "back there” -- obviously, we scaled things down in here. Tower A was a few feet away from tower B. But when you're saying "over there,” if we scale that up, that's miles away; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, again, as I said, generally, our cell site density is about a mile and a half, maybe a little more in some places, so you're probably not going to go more than a mile and a half without encountering another cell site.
MR. DECOSTE: But we're talking in terms of miles?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: we are, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's talk about traffic now. So each individual sector has a maximum amount of traffic that it can handle; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: So give you a hypothetical: Tower A goes down; right? So then all that traffic that would normally be on tower A gets pushed onto one of the sectors of tower B; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Possible. Yes.
MR. DECOSTE: If all of that traffic from tower A on top of the normal traffic that would be on one of those sectors on tower B, it could overload that sector; right?
Let me rephrase that, because that makes it seem like it will go down. It could be more traffic than that sector could handle; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It could be, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: which would then cause callers to kick to a third tower, tower C; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It is possible, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And, again, we don't have any documents showing the traffic limits of any of the towers in Miami; right?
MR. DECOSTE: And we don't have any of the records showing what, if any, sectors or towers were down on the handful of dates that we have for the handful of towers; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm going to bring you back over to your slide show.
Can you see that okay?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I can, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. If you could explain to the jury again what this slide represents.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: we were looking at a series of events, phone calls or text messages, between the involved parties on the morning of July 19th.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there a reason we have a smaller slide today?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: If you want to transfer off of --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yeah, he's on --
MR. DECOSTE: It's off of my computer for the -- not having to deal with the page problem we had yesterday.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. Okay. I'm sorry. Just liked the bigger one. with getting old, it makes it easier for me to see.
MR. DECOSTE: Does that work out?
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's good. ~=BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: All right. So, Sergeant, what you're talking about now -- we're going to switch over, and I'm showing you now Defense 10. what you're talking about is these calls right here; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That -- this particular slide is dealing with, like, 10:04 through 10:23 a.m.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, correct me if I'm wrong. what we're looking at here are the call detail records for Katherine Magbanua on the morning of July 19th.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: The first communication is right there. That's Luis Rivera calling Katherine Magbanua; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And these calls go in between the timeframe of 10:20 and 10:31; right?
MR. DECOSTE: Now, going back over to your slide, what you have here are the movements of Luis Rivera plotted in blue; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The cell sites he's communicating with are plotted in blue, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: So can you say what path of travel he was taking? He's over in Miami at 10:07, but somehow, three minutes later, he's down in between Miami Beach and Miami. That's just a situation that he's hitting different towers; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct. The cell sites he's communicating with does not mean he is standing at the base of that tower, obviously. The tower has a coverage area, and he is somewhere within the coverage area of that cell site.
As I mentioned before, crossing the water, there's no obstructions and that signal is much likely to -- more likely to travel further than it would if he were in town. So that could be consistent with him crossing a bridge or crossing that waterway, and his handset would be able to see a cell site that was located further south.
MR. DECOSTE: It could also be consistent with him, once the call start, traveling over here to Miami Beach; right?
MR. DECOSTE: Now, this is your next slide; right?
MR. DECOSTE: Now, again, that's not Rivera's residence. That's a residence of Jessica Rodriguez; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Rivera's residence is over on Miami Beach.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: His listed address, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, what you have here, you have the -- all of the data that you have for Katherine Magbanua -- now, correct me if I'm wrong. The pings that you had for her were between the timeframes of 10:06 and 10:23.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: On the previous slide, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. And during that time, between the timeframe of 10:20 and 10:31, there's phone calls that are being placed; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: From who? I'm sorry.
MR. DECOSTE: Let's go back over to Defense 10. There's phone calls being placed up until 10:31; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And one would assume you're not going to call somebody that you're standing next to; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, just to make sure this is clear, you've put in all the data for about a half hour's worth of time on one map; right?
MR. DECOSTE: So what we're seeing here is that Luis Rivera is in the vicinity of Jessica Rodriguez's house. But correct me if I'm wrong. He's hitting the south side of this tower, maybe the south of the west side, and the west side of that tower.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No, sir. He's -- I'm sorry, are you saying the sectors he's communicating with are inconsistent with his house?
MR. DECOSTE: No. I'm just asking which sector he's on.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: He is on a sector -- for the 10:37 event, he's on a sector that's oriented about -- let me see. I'll have to pull up a different map to tell you the exact sector.
Again, here, I'm just representing the actual cell sites that he's communicating with and their proximity to the residence he was staying at.
MR. DECOSTE: I'm going to go back to the other screen. Basically, we can say that he's in and around Miami Beach and Miami on the morning of July 19th; right?
MR. DECOSTE: You can't put his exact location anywhere.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, correct me if I'm wrong. The timeframe that -- I'll enlarge it for you a little bit. Tell me if it's too small.
Now, correct me if I'm wrong. The last -- and the word is "ping"; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Communication.
MR. DECOSTE: The last communication that Katherine Magbanua's handset has with one of the towers is at 10:31, which is well before Luis Rivera is even in the area, or his handset is even in the area.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, he has events at 10:23, which would be more consistent with the island than being near his residence. His next event, I believe we have there, would be 10:35. So somewhere in that timeframe, he begins to communicate with cell sites closer to where he was staying.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, because there was no use of Katherine Magbanua's handset, you can't say that she's still even within that area.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Just because there isn't any stuff on her phone going on for the next, what is it, 60 minutes?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe it's 40-some minutes. It's 11:23 is the next event.
MR. DECOSTE: And that's something that's standard with cell phones. They're just -- they're not being used.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Right now, I'm cross-examining you and my phone isn't being used; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. Now, the arrow that you have, do you know what roadway that is?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It's the major highway there.
MR. DECOSTE: 95 North; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No. That's not 95.
MR. DECOSTE: which one is that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe that's U.S. 1.
MR. DECOSTE: That turns into 95?
You tell me. I don't know.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I'm not familiar. It's, I believe, what they call Biscayne Boulevard maybe.
MR. DECOSTE: You'd agree with me that that's a major throughway in Miami?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It appears to be, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: All right. Now, it appears to be because it's -- on maps, you know the wider roads are usually indicative of multi lanes.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Like highways.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, in a major city like Miami, would highways have traffic?
MR. DECOSTE: So what we have here in a nutshell is -- and correct me if I'm wrong. I just want to make sure that we have it clear. We can say that on the morning of July 19th, Luis Rivera was in and around Miami and Miami Beach.
MR. DECOSTE: And Katherine Magbanua was in and around Miami.
MR. DECOSTE: Could be consistent with something going on at Jessica Rodriguez's house.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Could be.
MR. DECOSTE: Could be consistent with Katherine Magbanua driving north, driving south, driving around doing errands; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Could be.
MR. DECOSTE: Last topic. I promised five minutes so I'll speed it up.
You were asked questions about Cellebrite extractions.
MR. DECOSTE: You reviewed -- you received, from Apple, Charles Adelson's iCloud information.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The Tallahassee Police Department did, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You get that raw data. You run it through the Cellebrite reader program; right?
MR. DECOSTE: And it allows you to be able to take a look at the information that's contained in that.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It does.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct me if I'm wrong. You have over 300,000 iMessages for Charles Adelson.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That sounds correct.
MR. DECOSTE: And this covers as early as 2012 all the way up to 2016.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Sergeant, I'm handing you what's been premarked as Defense 12. You know what that is, don't you?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes, sir.
MR. DECOSTE: Those are screen shots of the Cellebrite reader with specific iMessages for Charles Adelson's iCloud data.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, you know that because you reviewed -- you know the cellebrite reader, and you reviewed his data.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I reviewed most of his data, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Defense 12 is a fair and accurate depiction of one -- what one would see in the Cellebrite reader program; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It is, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You were asked a question by Ms. Norris yesterday if, in your review, there was any evidence whatsoever of communications in between Sigfredo Garcia and Charles Adelson.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, at the beginning of the cross-examination, in your first cross that ties into this, we talked about how there can be other types of electronic communications that you may not see; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: One could make a phone call through whatsApp.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They could.
MR. DECOSTE: Make a phone call through Facebook.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They could.
MR. DECOSTE: Could message through whatsApp.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They could.
MR. DECOSTE: They could call from a phone that isn't on your radar during the investigation.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, if you can explain to the jury Defense 12. we have a highlighted line --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Has this been offered into evidence?
MR. DECOSTE: Oh, move into evidence what's been premarked as Defense 12.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any further objections?
MS. NORRIS: No, Your Honor, no objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any further?
MR. ZANGENEH: No, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. It'll be admitted.
(Defendant Magbanua Exhibit No. 12 received in evidence.)
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Sergeant, if you can explain what we're seeing here.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: This is a -- One way to look at some of the data, not as efficient but we have basically a timeline. And so the cellebrite will collect all of the events in the phone and assemble them into a timeline, so if a picture is taken at 9:00 o'clock and there's a phone call at 9:02 and a text message at 9:05, we can see those things as they occur chronologically.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Mr. Zangeneh, if you need to move, you're free to move about.
MR. ZANGENEH: I can see, Your Honor. Thank you very much.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Sergeant -- oh, were you done?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, as opposed to just looking at all the pictures or looking at all the text messages or all the phone calls individually, we can see these in this timeline view.
So you have an indication of the "from" phone number, which would be Ms. Magbanua's number.
MR. DECOSTE: well, I'm going to ask you another question first --
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Okay.
MR. DECOSTE: -- before we go into that timeline.
This over here, the 306,000, is that the amount of events that are in this Cellebrite?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Those are events in the timeline. So those could be calendar entries, again, call logs, text messages, pictures, all those things that populate in the timeline. So that's how many events of pretty much all categories.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, correct me if I'm wrong. This is a text message from Katherine Magbanua's phone number to Charles Adelson's phone number.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It is, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: And the message is right here under "body"; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: who is Tuto?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Tuto's the nickname for Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: And what is the message?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "Did Tuto call your phone?"
MR. DECOSTE: And that's right here; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, this is an almost immediate response from Charles Adelson to Katherine Magbanua. And what's the message back?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "No."
MR. DECOSTE: Moments later, there's another message. And what is the message that Charles Adelson writes to Katherine Magbanua?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "Actually, he did.”
MR. DECOSTE: Few seconds later, another message. And what's that message?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It's a little hard for me to read. Something to the effect of --
MR. DECOSTE: I don't -- I don't want to burn your eyes up.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Thank you.
"He invited me to go deep sea fishing. He was so nice.”
MR. DECOSTE: Now, you know -- and I hate to sound so crude. You know the cell phone stuff; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I do, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: You're in no position to determine what is sarcasm, what is the context of a text message between other people, are you?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, in all of the, probably now, hundreds of thousands to millions of communications, actual communications that I've looked at, I can tell you that I've done it a lot, if that helps draw context.
MR. DECOSTE: But you're in no different position than anybody else that sends and receives text messages; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. DECOSTE: The next message that we have -- correct me if I'm wrong -- this is from Katherine Magbanua back to Charles Adelson: "I'm serious."
Now, in your experience of looking at millions of messages, would that not indicate that she is not joking around?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That would indicate that she thinks his response was joking. As in, no, I'm serious, did he call you?
MR. DECOSTE: And what's her full message?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "He's fucking driving me crazy."
MR. DECOSTE: Next message?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "Is your cell phone listed online?”
MR. DECOSTE: Now, that's from Katherine Magbanua to Charles Adelson.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Last message?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "I don't think my cell is listed online.”
MR. DECOSTE: what are the relevant dates of your investigation? It was June for the first trip and July for the second trip when the murder happened; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Now, this would be a handful of weeks before all that happened; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: April 25th of 2014.
MR. DECOSTE: AS an expert, can you rule out the possibility that Sigfredo Garcia and Charles Adelson were communicating through other phones, through other apps, or through other electronic communications? Can you rule that out?
MS. NORRIS: Objection; speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: TI cannot.
MR. DECOSTE: One brief moment, Your Honor.
Sorry, Your Honor, I've got to go back to the --
JUDGE HANKINSON: We're going to have to get you a new watch, Mr. DeCoste. It's after five minutes.
MR. DECOSTE: I'll make it up on another examination later. I'1Il shave some time. Sorry.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: Sergeant, real brief, what do those Xs mean?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: XS mean that they've been deleted.
MR. DECOSTE: All the messages were deleted.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, the ones that you have there are, yes.
MR. DECOSTE: Between -- now, again, this would be deleted on Charles Adelson's side; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Final questions: You have evidence that Sigfredo Garcia got rid of his phone --
MR. DECOSTE: -- after the homicide.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Luis Rivera --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, as to classification. "Got rid of his phone."
JUDGE HANKINSON: Restate your question, please, Mr. DeCoste.
BY MR. DECOSTE:
MR. DECOSTE: You testified that you learned that Sigfredo Garcia stopped using his phone after the homicide.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Same with Luis Rivera eventually.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Not Katherine Magbanua.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Thank you, Your Honor. Nothing further.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Redirect?
MS. NORRIS: Yes, sir.
REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Are you prepared for this?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness nods head.)
MS. NORRIS: To dovetail into the last question you were asked, were most of the messages that Charlie Adelson had with Katherine Magbanua deleted in his phone?
MS. NORRIS: Not just that one particular conversation that defense counsel showed.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MS. NORRIS: I want to go back to yesterday. Briefly, when we were discussing, like, the Comfort Rental Car -- this is the June trip, the vehicle that Sigfredo Garcia rented from Comfort, can you pull up -- well, strike that.
MS. NORRIS: Your Honor, at this time I'd offer into evidence State's Exhibit 122, the UTC with the certified court record documentation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Any additional objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: I'll stand on my previous objections, Your Honor.
MR. DECOSTE: Same, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. My ruling will be the same. I'll admit 122. I will allow recross on this issue.
(State's Exhibit No. 122 received in evidence.)
MS. NORRIS: Yes, sir.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Did law enforcement have reason to believe -- or have reason or an explanation for why it was Sigfredo Garcia rented the Nissan on June 2nd and then exchanged that vehicle for a Hyundai Sonata on June 3rd?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge; facts not in evidence and speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Can you show us the traffic citation, please, State's Exhibit 122 that was just admitted. Publish that.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: And does this slide show the detail for State's exhibit 122, the traffic citation?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It does.
MS. NORRIS: To whom was that issued?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: To Sigfredo Garcia.
MS. NORRIS: On what date?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: On June 6th -- or I'm sorry, June 2nd of 2014.
MS. NORRIS: At what time?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: 9:48 p.m.
MS. NORRIS: And do you recall what time the Nissan was rented from Comfort, approximately?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe 8:50 was the timeframe, if I recall.
MS. NORRIS: Okay. Now, can you go back to the traffic citation?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: And is the vehicle indicated on the UTC the same make and model of -- and color of vehicle and tag of vehicle that Mr. Garcia rented from Comfort Rental?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It is, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And was it subsequent to this traffic citation that the vehicle was exchanged at Comfort for the Hyundai Sonata?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It was, yes.
MS. NORRIS: All of the records you have been talking about, both the first time you testified and yesterday and today, are those real-time location information, or are they historical call detail records?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They are historical call detail records.
MS. NORRIS: with historical call detail records, do we get the content of voice communications? Meaning, if I were to call you and we talked for five minutes, do those records give us the content of what we're talking about over the telephone?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It does not.
MS. NORRIS: You were asked yesterday by Mr. Zangeneh about your knowledge of a federal wiretap on Mr. Rivera in 2014 --
MS. NORRIS: -- related to gang activity.
Did the FBI provide you with names associated with different gang members and the phone numbers associated with those individuals?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They provided a number of names and phone numbers, which, to my understanding, at least some of those did come from that wiretap.
MS. NORRIS: Were you able to cross-reference those with the numbers -- sorry.
were you able to cross-reference those names and phone numbers with phone records of persons of interest in this particular murder investigation?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. They were added in, again, to our analytical software. Those names were added in. So any reports or call logs or things that were generated would show the phone number and the name. So those were provided to the investigators; makes it easier for them when evaluating days or looking at communications to see a name with a number.
MS. NORRIS: And once that was done, was there any phone evidence in this case to suggest that this murder involved a Latin King gang activity?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: None that I'm aware of.
MS. NORRIS: Regarding the lack of cell phone evidence that Sigfredo Garcia went on this June trip in 2014 with Luis Rivera, is there any phone evidence which proves that Sigfredo Garcia was not on the June trip in 2014?
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection; outside the scope of direct.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. ZANGENEH: Scope of cross, Judge. I apologize.
JUDGE HANKINSON: JI understood your objection. ~=BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Do you need me to ask the question again?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No. I understand.
Again, without having any location information, there's certainly no way to say that he wasn't on the trip.
MS. NORRIS: In your demonstrative visual aid where you've indicated Luis Rivera's residence on these demonstrative maps, what exact address did you use?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It was -- I'm sorry, I don't know off the top of my head -- 135th Street. I could actually get the actual numerics if you need.
MS. NORRIS: If you could, I'd like --
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. I was given 1505 Northeast 135th Street in North Miami.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do that one more time. I'm sorry.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: 1505 Northeast 135th Street, North Miami.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Is there any evidence that you are aware of that Luis Rivera was staying at this Normandy address you've been asked about repeatedly?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Again, none that I'm aware of.
MS. NORRIS: Did you have phone records to review to see where it appeared Luis Rivera was putting his head every night?
MS. NORRIS: And were those consistent with Jessica Rodriguez's house throughout this time period we're focusing on?
MS. NORRIS: If you could pull up for me -- this would be the June 2nd, 2014 map, demonstrative. And it shows -- this is the one showing Katherine Magbanua's handset moving from her residence to the Comfort -- the area of the Comfort Rental Car.
Are there a lot of towers in this area we're being shown?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. Actually, the small red dots represent the other Sprint cell sites in the area. The large red dot obviously is the one that her handset is communicating with.
MS. NORRIS: Can you zoom in on the Comfort Rental Car?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: And the red dot for the 8:53 through 8:58, is that just a larger red dot indicating the exact tower that she's communicating with?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And zoom in a little more for me, please.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: And that fat red arrow is this -- I guess, if you were to make -- think of it as a pie with the sectors, that fat red arrow is indicating she's somewhere this direction --
MS. NORRIS: -- that that arrow is pointing.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. So the particular side of the cell site she's communicating with is this one. It's oriented in this direction. And again, we talked about we expect, as the handset travels around a cell site, that this sector is going to cover until this one picks up, and that one. And I apologize. They're small in this particular slide. So that does put her, the coverage area of that cell site, somewhere in this direction.
MS. NORRIS: Can you zoom back out again for me? One more time. One more time. Can you also pull up -- oh, wait.
Can you also pull up -- this is the July 17th location near Trescott Drive. Zoom out on that for me as well. One more time.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: Okay. what are -- what are all these little blue things on this map?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Those would be the other AT&T cell sites. Mr. Rivera's phone is an -- was an AT&T phone, so these are +the AT&T cell sites.
MS. NORRIS: So these are all the cell sites in this -- the area shown of Tallahassee that a phone on that -- with that cell carrier could be communicating with at that particular time.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: And zoom back in on the one with the fat arrow on it.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: So --
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: There's two. Sorry.
MS. NORRIS: That's okay.
So all of those towers that we just saw for this particular event on July 17th for Luis Rivera's phone, of all those towers, these are the two that it's communicating with.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: And do the two large arrows indicate that -- would it be reasonable to expect the handset to be somewhere in that -- the area that those big fat arrows are pointing?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. When we have an event that maybe toggles between two cell sites, it communicates with one -- possibly begins an event on one, ends on another, and when those sectors are oriented towards one another, it's reasonable to conclude that they're not beyond this cell site or beyond this cell site. They're actually somewhere in between those two cell sites.
MS. NORRIS: And the pictures that we've seen here of the maps showing numerous cell locations -- and sometimes the language was used "miles and miles and miles apart." They may be a mile, mile and a half apart, at most.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, that density changes a lot. And here within the city, they're very close together. As you get out into the rural parts of the county, they're much further apart, as you can see here. So -- and that is true in south Florida as well. They're a little closer together because the population density is higher, but it's a difficult question to answer because it varies by where you're at.
MS. NORRIS: So if we're looking here in Tallahassee -- we're a smaller town, you'd agree, than Miami. Miami would have even closer -- more towers that would be even closer to one another.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: Mr. DeCoste asked you some questions about this kind of parade of horribles of one tower could be out of service and be down, and then maybe the next tower --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, move to strike; counsel testifying. "Parade of horribles.”
JUDGE HANKINSON: Rephrase, please, Ms. Norris.
MS. NORRIS: I can rephrase.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: You were asked about a series of events that could possibly happen. For example, one tower could be down and then the neighboring tower could also be down and so forth. And then in addition, one tower might have too much traffic along with the towers being out of service, et cetera.
Is there any indication that the locations and cell sites and sectors that you have told this jury about on each of these slides, is there any indication that any of those factors were at play in those situations?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Again, there's no indication. what we're looking at is the cell site and the sector that the handset communicated with, so we know that one is functioning because the handset actually used it. As we continue to look at events over a period of time, and while it's not conclusive, we do see that her handset communicates with, over the course of the investigation, every one of those cell sites that we saw; at some point or another, her handset communicates with, which again, would be another at least indicator the cell sites are there and functional.
MS. NORRIS: Because if you have a record showing it's communicating with --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; leading.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: would you have records of a handset communicating with a tower if that tower were down?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: would you have a record of a handset communicating with a tower if that tower were down under the hypotheticals you got?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No. If a handset communicates with a tower in a sector, we know that that's functional, at least that sector is functional for that event.
MS. NORRIS: And you're taking into -- are you taking into account multiple different factors when determining what tower a handset is communicating with?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, really, that determination is very simple. That's in the records and that is taken directly from the records provided to us by the carrier, and I simply take that information and place it on the map and show the orientation of that particular sector. And then it's a simple matter of comparing other locations that may or may not be covered by that cell site.
MS. NORRIS: In your experience, how common is it for a cell site or a tower to be down or inoperable?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: In my experience, it's uncommon.
MS. NORRIS: Do most of these towers or cell sites have any capabilities to back themselves up should they have a outage or go down?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, there's certainly backup power considerations that, if we lose power for some reason in a natural disaster, there may be generator backup for them; and, again, the way the network is laid out, that there is sufficient coverage should a cell site not be functional for whatever reason, that there is other cell sites your handset could communicate with.
MS. NORRIS: If you have told us that a particular -- throughout your presentation, if you have told us that a particular location is within a coverage area of a cell site, how confident are you that that location is within the coverage area of the cell site that you --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; improper question, bolstering.
JUDGE HANKINSON: It's also fairly convoluted. I'll] sustain the objection. I'm not real sure what the question asked for.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: I'll try to rephrase.
For the locations you've indicated to this jury about what cell site is being communicated with, are you confident in those locations?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; improper bolstering.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: How do you know that the sectors you've indicated are accurate?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, again, they're taken from the carrier records.
MS. NORRIS: The evening of July 14th -- to remind you from yesterday, this was the dinner with Charlie Adelson between -- or with Katherine Magbanua.
There was some suggestion about Luis Rivera's driver's license location, Normandy Avenue, being near where Charlie Adelson's phone was. Do you recall that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: Based on all of the evidence that you have in this case, is it more consistent with being at Katherine Magbanua's residence than the Normandy address?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; improper question, speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. DECOSTE: And goes to the ultimate issue of the case.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: As those locations are so close together, I would not be able to rule out one over the other.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Is there any indication that Luis Rivera's handset is at that Normandy address at that location and time?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I do not recall -- he was actually in that area at some point in the evening, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Prior to the later event.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I don't recall the exact time, but he, again, was in that area, yes.
MS. NORRIS: That evening of July 14th, was -- how many --
JUDGE HANKINSON: You're looking down and talking, Ms. Norris. And I'm sorry, I can't understand you.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: That July 14th evening, how many weeks was that after the June tip?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Oh, geez, six or seven weeks. The June trip was June 4th, 5th, so this is 14 days into July now.
MS. NORRIS: May I retrieve some exhibits, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: One thing I want to make sure of: On Defense Exhibits 8 -- sorry, I have them out of order -- 7, 8, 9, and 10, all of the times on these are correct; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well --
JUDGE HANKINSON: why don't you show him what you're talking about, please, Ms. Norris.
MS. NORRIS: May I approach?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: So the original question asked of me was, when first evaluating these, do they accurately represent the records? And they do, absolutely.
As far as the times, they are correct in the records, but we understand that sometimes the times may not be correct to our location. So for Sprint records, we know that their text messages are delivered to us in Central Time, so we make an adjustment as we look at the records to make sure that we're looking at them from our perspective. The AT&T records are provided in Coordinated Universal Time so we have to do an adjustment for that. The records are correct. The times are accurate. We just need to know the time zone for them. ////f
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: well, what time zone are these records in, the defense exhibits?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: These are the records from Ms. Magbanua and Sprint so, again, the voice phone calls are in the time that her handset was, which would have been Eastern Time, and the text messages are in Central Time.
MS. NORRIS: So any text messages would need to be adjusted in what way?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They would need to have an hour added to them.
MS. NORRIS: Madam Clerk, do you have Defense Exhibit 6?
COURT CLERK: They didn't admit that one.
MS. NORRIS: It's not admitted?
(Sotto voce discussion.)
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: I want to show you what's in evidence as Defense Exhibit 7. Starting with the first page, do you see, for example, these two purple -- I know you can't read the numbers but the two purple events here on June 4th? One is at 17:21:12. The other is at 17:21:13.
And for called number, there's some codes here, like 812. what does that mean?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, as we see the notation there of routed calls, most of the incoming calls that we see to Ms. Magbanua's handset are routed somewhere within the network somehow. So we're just seeing an indication again of routing, and there are a few reasons for that. The call did complete in that particular case. There's no indication that it went to voice mail, but there is some inter-network routing of that call.
MS. NORRIS: So is that two separate calls?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No, it is one call.
MS. NORRIS: So although it appears -- okay.
I want to ask you the same question about page 2 of Defense Exhibit 7. For example, up here, there are two purple lines to this number ending in 6403, and it appears that -- for example, this one was at 22:18:47 and then another one at 22:18:47. Are those different events?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No. Those, again, same event. And in this case, there is indication that it was routed to voice mail for this particular call.
MS. NORRIS: And the last one I want to point out are these blue numbers down here that are highlighted where we have, for example, three of those on June 5th had the exact same time, 13:16:07. Are those three separate events?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They are most likely not in this case. They're not three separate events. They are, again, one event showing some routing and a redirection to voice mail.
In any of the summaries that I put together for this, the best way to know -- we're looking at the incoming events here in her phone and we're seeing some routing, and it could be one call, it could be two calls. The easiest thing for me to do is go back to the other person's phone records and see how many outgoing events there are.
So in any of those demonstratives, I made sure to look at the -- if we had them, the other person's phone records to see how many times they actually dialed her number, and that helped me reduce any of those extra events in the records.
MS. NORRIS: So would you agree with me that the raw records that you were asked to review and that were introduced into evidence yesterday, Defense Exhibit 7, 8, 9, and 10, may make it appear to a layperson's eyes that these are multiple, multiple events; but to someone with your training and experience, you know that they're only single events?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Turning now to Defense Exhibit -- I think this is actually the same exhibit, Exhibit 7. Do you recall being asked a series of questions about -- you put up the map of the June trip up from Miami to Tallahassee. Do you remember that?
MS. NORRIS: And you were asked how many phone calls there were between Katherine Magbanua and I believe it was Sigfredo Garcia.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe so, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And defense counsel had narrowed that timeframe for which they wanted to know how many calls there were between Katherine Magbanua and Sigfredo Garcia to just the travel.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: I believe you indicated it started around 1:40 a.m. and they arrived in Tallahassee approximately 12:38 p.m. Is that right?
MS. NORRIS: Did it appear the majority of that travel was during the middle of the night?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It did, yes.
MS. NORRIS: If you were not limited to that -- well, strike that.
You did have one call in that time period, didn't you?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: we did, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And what time was that call?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe that was -- and I apologize for not having exact times up, but I think we had a 9:55 call.
MS. NORRIS: Is that this call highlighted in green?
MS. NORRIS: And that was an outgoing call from Katherine -- or from Katherine Magbanua's handset to Sigfredo Garcia.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: In the morning hours.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: At this time, Your Honor, I'd like to publish what's in evidence as State's Exhibit 181.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: If you expand the June trip, and don't just look at the drive during the middle of the night but look at the entire June trip as a whole, is there substantial communication between Katherine Magbanua and Sigfredo Garcia?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: There are.
MS. NORRIS: On the 5th of June 2014, how many communications are there between these two handsets?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I'm sorry. Counting from across the room, I'd say about 14 -- 13 or 14.
MS. NORRIS: would you describe that as constant communication?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I would say at least regular communication.
It does appear to be 14.
MS. NORRIS: Fourteen times?
MS. NORRIS: And then on the 6th, we have approximately five additional ones for this particular timeframe.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: Now I want to show you what's in evidence as Defense Exhibit 9, the second page. Mr. DeCoste asked you if there was any call between Sigfredo Garcia and Katherine Magbanua's handsets prior to 12:00 p.m. on July 17th, 2014. Do you recall that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe so, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Is there any call between Sigfredo Garcia and Katherine Magbanua's handset on the 17th?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes, there are calls between their handsets on the 17th.
MS. NORRIS: And are those indicated here by the green highlights?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct. Yes.
MS. NORRIS: And who is calling who in that record?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: For all of those events, we show -- again, this is Ms. Magbanua's records, so outbound from her records means that she is doing the calling. So those are outbound calls from her to Mr. Garcia's number.
MS. NORRIS: And what are the times of those two calls to Sigfredo Garcia?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The first two are at 1:51 and 1:52.
MS. NORRIS: P.M.?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: P.M., yeah. Sorry.
MS. NORRIS: Now, Your Honor, if I may publish State's Exhibit 182, which is in evidence?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Does this exhibit show the communications between Katherine Magbanua and Sigfredo Garcia on the July trip?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It does, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And do we see those two calls from Magbanua's handset to Garcia's handset at 1:51 and 1:52 on the day before the murder?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct. Yes.
MS. NORRIS: How many other communications are there between Ms. Magbanua and Mr. Garcia's handsets on the 17th?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: On the 17th?
MS. NORRIS: Yes, sir.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Again, I'm sorry, trying to read across the room. I want to say ten.
MS. NORRIS: In addition to the 1:51 and 1:52 calls?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, no. That would include those.
I think I see 11 not including them, so we'll say nine additional.
MS. NORRIS: Sorry, my computer went to sleep. Sorry. One second.
Now I want to look at Defense Exhibit 10. And these are -- are these the calls from Saturday morning, July 19th?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Do these records indicate that Mr. Rivera called Katherine Magbanua, not the other way around?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MS. NORRIS: But they clearly communicated. would you agree with that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They did, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Prior to that phone call, Mr. Rivera and Ms. Magbanua's handsets had never communicated?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; improper question. The records are limited.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: I also want to show you now State's Exhibit 97. I'm sorry, it can't all fit on there.
Are these the communications between the relevant parties Saturday morning, July 19th?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection as to “relevant parties.”
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: For this -- for this particular summary, it's actually all the communications for that morning.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: If -- you were asked some questions yesterday about Luis Rivera's testimony. Do you recall that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I do, yes.
MS. NORRIS: would these records be indicative of Katherine Magbanua's handset attempting desperately to get in contact with Mr. Garcia's handset?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes, it would.
MS. NORRIS: And at the time of these beginning calls, 9:44 through approximately just before 10:00 o'clock, that's when she's traveling south from the direction of Charles Adelson's house.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: During that time period, that was the slide you showed us of her communication records showing her traveling south.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: And the direction she was traveling south, is Charles Adelson's residence located north of that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It was, yes.
MS. NORRIS: After the beginning communications, are Luis Rivera, Sigfredo -- strike that. Not Sigfredo Garcia.
But aren't Luis Rivera and Katherine Magbanua's handsets consistent with being near the area of Luis Rivera's house?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: After that timeframe, the 10:31 event, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And that's the same night that Mr. Rivera and Mr. Garcia's handsets returned from Tallahassee to Miami.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, this would be the morning after that.
MS. NORRIS: The following morning.
MS. NORRIS: Once you have them all in the same area, Mr. Rivera and Ms. Magbanua and we don't know where Mr. Garcia's handset is, that 50-minute period or 40-some-odd-minute period you were asked about, during that time, is there any communications between Garcia, Magbanua, and Rivera?
MS. NORRIS: Can you pull up Saturday, July 19th, the slide? It is showing Ms. Magbanua's -- oh, I need to switch here. I want you to show the location information for that 9:44 a.m. beginning series of calls.
Can I have you plug in an address for me?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I can try, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Is there a way to do that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Not in the way I am right now, but we can probably get to that. If you want to mute me for just one second.
MS. NORRIS: Sure.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: sorry.
And, I'm sorry, what would be the address?
MS. NORRIS: I want you to look up 10735 Northeast 9th Avenue.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Is that Biscayne Park?
MS. NORRIS: Yes.
(A pause in the proceeding.)
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Okay. Sorry. /////
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Okay. Where is that address in relation to Katherine Magbanua's events beginning at 9:44 a.m. on July 19th?
Are you ready for me --
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. Yes.
And I apologize. From this particular map, I can't make a note on there right now, but this is the Northeast 9th Avenue that -- the address that I was asked about. That particular numeric would appear to be near this intersection here. So as we come out a little bit, I'll leave my arrow on where that address is. we can see it's not that terribly far from where her handset's communicating for those events.
MS. NORRIS: Can you zoom out again to show me the 9:44 a.m. events?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: (witness complies.)
MS. NORRIS: So -- I wish T had a laser pointer but I don't.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I do.
MS. NORRIS: May I use that, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Certainly.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: So if -- and correct me if I'm wrong. But you indicated that location was somewhere around here.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It still should be where the mouse pointer is.
MS. NORRIS: Oh, where is it? Okay. Sorry.
So right there is that address I just gave you of 10735 Northeast 9th Avenue.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: You were asked yesterday about, hypothetically, if Ms. Magbanua could be coming from Yindra's, Yindra Mascaro's house; is that --
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: And you didn't know what her address is, did you?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I didn't tie the name to the address. As I looked at it on the map, I realize I was familiar with it.
MS. NORRIS: Okay. So you are familiar with Ms. Yindra Mascaro's address?
MS. NORRIS: Okay. And it's that -- where your little pointer is right there.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MS. NORRIS: So is Katherine Magbanua's handset's path of travel consistent with her leaving Yindra Mascaro's house?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It would not be.
MS. NORRIS: Yesterday you were asked some questions, for example, by defense counsel about the Comfort Rental Car location back in June when Magbanua's handset travels from her residence to the Comfort Rental location back to her residence. You were asked whether that could be indicative of her dropping someone off at the airport. Do you recall that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I do.
MS. NORRIS: Do you also recall being asked some questions about the July 19th time period from 10:00 to 10:30 a.m., and Mr. DeCoste pointed out some houses and said she could have been at this house, she could have been at this house, et cetera?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MS. NORRIS: Is it also, going back to the Comfort Rental location, consistent with Ms. Magbanua's handset going to Comfort to rent a car and then returning to her residence?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It is also consistent with that, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Same thing for the many different houses: Is it consistent -- you know, could she have been at any of these other houses? Is it also possible it could be consistent with her being at Mr. Rivera's residence for a money drop on Saturday morning?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: Another question you were asked dealt with each particular set of data that we went through from June through July, and you were asked, you know, you have no information that that ties her to a murder. Do you recall that question?
MS. NORRIS: when you're doing your cell phone analysis in a case like this, are you looking at each particular event in isolation?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No, certainly not.
MS. NORRIS: Are you looking at all of the events combined to determine, you know, what type of activity is going on?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes. We try to look at as much as we have to either add context or meaning or to give us some indication of what may be occurring. And obviously in this case, it was a voluminous amount of information, but we tried to look at as much as we could.
MS. NORRIS: For Saturday, July 19th, that morning, are there any phone records for Luis Rivera that could be consistent with the barber shop that's right next to his house that he goes to?
MS. NORRIS: I think the last slide I want you to -- I want to ask you about is -- let me get to it. Sorry. This is the one =from July 19th showing Luis Rivera's handset. Yes, sir, that one. Thank you.
Here we have several locations: Magbanua's residence and the yellow flag, then Ms. Carmona/Garcia residence with another yellow flag, and then Mr. Rivera's residence. Do the phone records support or would the phone records be consistent with Rivera's handset traveling from the area of his residence, including that potential barber shop, to Stefanie Carmona's house, and then returning to the Rivera residence?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They would be consistent with that, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And is it true that once Rivera's handset returns to the area of his residence, there's no further -- no further attempts to reach Sigfredo Garcia by any of these people?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Your legal objection?
MR. DECOSTE: Improper characterization, people versus handsets.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: You were asked some questions yesterday about Luis Rivera's old phone number. It was a 305 number. I believe it =was (305)935-6615.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That sounds correct, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Did Katherine Magbanua's handset ever call a number extremely similar to that number?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; relevance.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'‘11 overrule the objection.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: How close?
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Okay. Let me tell you. Did she ever call the number (305)934-6615?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No, she did not.
MS. NORRIS: Did she ever call (305)935-6615?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: You'll have to give me a second to look for that one.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection. Sidebar, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. Jury's probably about ready for a break anyway. why don't we take 15 minutes.
(Jury exits.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Mr. DeCoste?
MR. DECOSTE: Yes, Your Honor. Can I use the overhead to make the objection?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
MR. DECOSTE: It will make it simple.
Luis Rivera testified that his phone number was 305 --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Everybody either sit -- have a seat or step out. we've got some business to conduct.
MR. DECOSTE: Luis Rivera testified that his phone number was (305)934-6615. what shows up in the phone records is a phone number that is different than the phone number that actually belonged to him. The phone number that shows up in the records, and Sergeant here can tell us, is 934-6615.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Do that again.
MR. DECOSTE: The phone number that Luis Rivera testified about that was his is (305)934-6615 and that's a number that shows up in Katherine Magbanua's call records. what we have is we have a subpoena from Sherrie Bennett to Apple. There was a response from Apple with this business records certification, and we received this stack of documents from the State in discovery.
what Your Honor will see is that it's for Luis Rivera; the e-mail, tato1983@ymail; and the phone number is (305)935-6615, different phone number. Agent Patrick Sanford also did a report of his review, 935-6615. The phone number communicated by Katherine Magbanua was 934-6615, and I believe the sergeant will tell us that that's what in her records as well too.
That's what Luis Rivera testified about. So that's why I objected to relevance because it looks like to the jury that she's talking to Luis Rivera, but it's a different phone number.
That's all, Your Honor. Thank you.
JUDGE HANKINSON: MS. Norris?
MS. NORRIS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And, frankly, I don't remember exactly what Mr. Rivera testified to but -- anyway.
Have a seat, Mr. DecCoste.
MR. DECOSTE: Yes, sir.
MS. NORRIS: Yes, sir. And I don't recall the exact number. I believe Ms. Cappleman, if I'm not mistaken, said I'm going to read a number to you and tell me if that sounds familiar, and he indicated, Yes, that sounds like my old number.
The State's argument here, and this is in response to the questions of Mr. DeCoste yesterday, is that Sergeant Corbitt can testify that there are only two times ever -- because Katherine Magbanua and Luis Rivera have never communicated but for that July 19th date -- there are only two times ever that Katherine Magbanua tried to call a number very similar to Mr. Rivera's. That number that she dialed was (305)934-6615.
She -- the two times that she attempted that number only one digit off from Mr. Rivera's previous phone number was on June 5th, the day before the first attempted murder, and on June 17th, the day before the actual murder. No other time did she ever attempt to call that particular phone number. I think that is significant because our --
JUDGE HANKINSON: June 5th and when?
MS. NORRIS: June 5th, 2014 and July 17, 2014.
And I think the coincidence of attempting to call a number only one digit off from Mr. Rivera's old number, then her --
JUDGE HANKINSON: what do you think his old number is?
MS. NORRIS: TI don't recall his exact testimony, but I know it was (305)93-something-6615.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I mean, they're saying we have records for a number. Do we have records for a phone number for Rivera?
MR. DECOSTE: I can hand them up to Your Honor.
MS. NORRIS: That's not -- I think he's asking for the --
You're talking about the call detail records for that phone number?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Right.
MS. NORRIS: That would be a question for Sergeant Corbitt, Your Honor. TI don't know. I don't believe so.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I don't believe so either.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I beg your pardon?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I don't believe we do, sir. I'm looking right now.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And you're waving something at us, Mr. DeCoste. What are the records you're waving at us?
MR. DECOSTE: The same things that I presented, Your Honor. I can show it on the --
JUDGE HANKINSON: But what are they? That's my question.
MR. DECOSTE: So this is the warrant that was sent to Apple by the Tallahassee Police Department. Apple responded first with a business records certification, and also now it's -- it was difficult -- it prints out different than the spreadsheet, but this is the response from Apple.
It's a 16-page document that has the e-mail address for Luis Rivera, the phone number that belonged to him. And then I have a 302 from Patrick Sanford that talks about his review of it, that the phone number belonging to Luis Rivera was the 935 number.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Apple doesn't give phone records, so what records are these that you're saying came from Apple?
MR. DECOSTE: Subscriber information.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Apple doesn't run a phone service, so what are the records supposed to be?
MR. DECOSTE: So this is going to show that Luis Rivera had -- I'll walk Your Honor through it.
JUDGE HANKINSON: JI understand what you're showing me, but it's records of what? It's not a phone record. Apple doesn't keep phone records. what is it a record of?
MR. DECOSTE: User information. This is all the data that Apple had to give back to the Tallahassee Police Department pursuant to the warrant that was sent to them.
JUDGE HANKINSON: For the 935 number.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is that what they were seeking?
MR. DECOSTE: well, actually, let me clarify that, Your Honor. In the warrant, it was all information for this e-mail address, not for a specific phone number. So they were trying to find anything that --
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's why I'm confused. Apple doesn't keep phone records. So you're saying that for that e-mail address, that's the subscriber number that was given?
MR. DECOSTE: What I think -- so this has I- -- Apple icloud account. I have Apple iCloud. When I want to get into it, I have to use an e-mail address anda password to log in. So I think that's why, and I can't assume what Sherrie Bennett was doing, but when they sent -- when they got this document signed by a judge for the search warrant that they wanted to find out from Apple anything that Apple had associated with the e-mail address that they knew applied to Luis Rivera.
Luis Rivera, again, is Tato. His date of birth is 4/25/1983, which is -- which is consistent here. So they sent that over to Apple, and Apple sent back everything they had for any log-ins using that e-mail address as the user name.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Ms. Norris?
MS. NORRIS: Your Honor, and my concern about those records, I think, is similar to the Court's as far as I think that is user-provided information to Apple as far as phone number, contact information. Mr. Rivera testified to this number. Ms. Magbanua's handset tried to call this number on two very pivotal dates out of all the records, both of which were during both murder trips. And that's the relevance and why I'm seeking to elicit --
JUDGE HANKINSON: And that's the 934 number.
MS. NORRIS: Yes, sir.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Which Mr. DeCoste agrees is the number Mr. Rivera said he was using?
MR. DECOSTE: No, Your Honor. So I knew this issue when it came up, and I made specific notes and I'm sure that if we go back in the record that what he said was his phone number was not 935. It was 934.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Right. And the State's agreeing with that. They've said she tried to call the 934 number.
MR. DECOSTE: No. No. Luis Rivera says his phone number was the 934 number.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Right.
MR. DECOSTE: The records show the 934 number. The number that belongs and we -- I think it's improper for us to assume what's entered in user information. The records from Apple show that Luis Rivera's phone number was 935.
JUDGE HANKINSON: They're -- that's not his phone records. That's a subscriber information in Apple.
But do you have calls to a 934 number?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I have three attempted calls.
JUDGE HANKINSON: What's that?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I have three attempted calls.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You seem to be supporting the State's argument that this is relevant, Mr. DeCoste. If that was Rivera's testimony, that his number is (305)934-6615, then calls by Ms. Magbanua to that number are relevant.
MR. DECOSTE: No, Your Honor. That's not his --
JUDGE HANKINSON: That's what you said.
MR. DECOSTE: That's not his number, though.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Well, that's what you contend. You're not a witness. He testified that it was 934-6615 according to you.
MR. DECOSTE: Correct. And that's what the records show. At no point did the state attorney's office or the Tallahassee Police Department try to get records for that phone. They did, however, try to get records for anything tying to the e-mail address known for Luis Rivera. In the information that was provided back -- now, it would be a gross assumption to say that this number was just entered in incorrectly. The number associated with Luis Rivera for Apple is a different phone number.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You're not making any sense. The testimony from Mr. Rivera is that his number is 934. we have phone calls from Ms. Magbanua to that number so it's relevant.
MR. DECOSTE: I would hope that the Court would allow us then to enter in the State's evidence that shows that the phone number that he actually had was a different phone number.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Well, you contend that's what it shows. That doesn't -- that doesn't convince me that that's accurate.
MR. DECOSTE: Your Honor, the only thing that I'd add is that for Agent Patrick Sanford that wrote a 302 with the phone number 305, it convinced him.
JUDGE HANKINSON: well, that's not the testimony before the Court. The objection at this point is a relevance objection. I overrule the relevance objection.
Y'all can take five minutes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Your Honor, can we make it ten minutes?
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. Ten minutes.
(A recess in the proceeding.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: Let's have the jury, please.
(Jury enters.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may proceed, Ms. Norris.
MS. NORRIS: Thank you, Your Honor.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Sergeant Corbitt, where we left off, if there's testimony that Luis Rivera had a old phone number of (305)934-6615, do we have any records that Katherine Magbanua's handset called (305)934-6615?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: we do, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And in all of the records that we have for Katherine Magbanua, how many times did she call that particular number?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: There were three attempts.
MS. NORRIS: And what were the dates of those attempts?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The first was June 5th of 2014 at 10:59 p.m. The second would have been July 17th of 2014 at 11:40 and then again at 11:41 p.m.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Those are both p.m.?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Both July 17ths, sir, yes; and both p.m. ~=BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: So total of three attempts by Magbanua's handset to Luis Rivera's old phone number.
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; asked and answered.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Sustained.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: what is the significance of the June 5th, 2014 date?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That was during the June trip to Tallahassee.
MS. NORRIS: what is the significance of the July 17th, 2014 date?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: During the July trip to Tallahassee.
MS. NORRIS: what is the next time she -- strike that.
Let me ask you, any of those three calls that Ms. Magbanua made to the 305 number --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; Ms. Magbanua versus handset.
MS. NORRIS: I'll clarify.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Of those three times that Katherine Magbanua's handset attempted to call the 305 number, first on June 5th and then again twice on July 17th, did any of those calls connect?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They do not appear to. They're extremely short duration: 14 seconds, 10 seconds, and 8 seconds.
MS. NORRIS: what could that be indicative of?
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; speculation.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Again, the person not answering, phone being out of service, or just changing her mind and hanging up. A number of reasons.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: After those attempts, are the -- what would be the next communication or attempted communication between Katherine Magbanua's handset and Luis Rivera's handset?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The known handset? The records we've already been talking about?
MS. NORRIS: The new one. Yes, sir.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: when would the next one be? Not until July 19th of 2014.
MS. NORRIS: And that was the Saturday morning where the handsets appeared to congregate near Mr. Rivera's residence?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: And am I correct that that communication between Magbanua's handset and Luis Rivera's handset occurred after Magbanua's handset reached out to Anthony ortiz?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: May I approach, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: I'm showing you what I've marked as State's Exhibit 183 and shown to defense counsel this morning. Do you recognize this document?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I do, yes.
MS. NORRIS: And what does it show?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: So this is also a portion of the icloud returns for Mr. Charlie Adelson. This is the same conversation that we spoke about earlier. This is from the chat section of that report, so it's organized a little differently but it's the same information.
MS. NORRIS: And is the content identical to defense exhibit you previously were looking at?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It is, yes.
MS. NORRIS: would you agree it's in a little bit more digestible or readable format?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It would appear to be, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Your Honor, at this time I'd offer into evidence State's Exhibit 183.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Is there objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: None from Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. They'll be admitted.
(State's Exhibit No. 183 received in evidence.)
MS. NORRIS: Permission to publish?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Are these messages in order chronologically from top to bottom?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They are, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Are you familiar with the expression about taking someone deep sea fishing?
MS. NORRIS: And what does that mean to you?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, I think an allusion to taking someone deep sea fishing or --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; invading the province of the jury.
MS. NORRIS: Your Honor, may --
MR. DECOSTE: Improper opinion.
MS. NORRIS: May I be heard?
JUDGE HANKINSON: It's speculation.
MR. DECOSTE: That too.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Proceed.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: You were asked if you believed, when I was questioning you yesterday, that there was any evidence to support communication between Charlie Adelson and Sigfredo Garcia --
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MS. NORRIS: -- is that right?
And you made those determinations based on your own training, experience, life experience when evaluating the evidence and the records and the iCloud in this case, didn't you?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MS. NORRIS: Did you consider this text thread or exchange between Mr. Adelson and Katherine Magbanua evidence of communication between Charlie Adelson and Katherine Magbanua [sic]?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No. I actually consider it evidence of no communication.
MS. NORRIS: And why is it that you did not consider this evidence of any communication between Mr. Adelson and Ms -- and Mr. Garcia?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well, I believe in reading the context or reading the messages here --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection --
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
MR. DECOSTE: -- speculation.
MS. NORRIS: You may continue.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The question is asked, "Did he call your phone?" And there's a response, no. Then there's additional response about going deep sea fishing and an exclamation that -- how nice he was. And the response to that is, "I'm serious.”
And to me, again, that means that she did not believe the response from Mr. Adelson was serious, and she was being serious and didn't want him -- she wanted him to understand that so, "I'm serious” --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection, Your Honor; same, invading the province of the jury.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: "I'm serious. He's driving me crazy.”
And then the question is, "Is your cell phone listed online?" And he says, "I don't think my cell is listed online.”
So to me this means that Mr. Garcia does not know Mr. Adelson's phone number and does not have, apparently at least, an easy way to obtain --
MR. DECOSTE: Objection; speculation, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Overruled.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: -- to obtain that phone number.
In addition to the chats being backed up in the call log -- or in the iCloud, we also have the call logs. we have other records of communication that may be in there, and a search for Mr. Garcia's phone number returned nothing. There was no indication that there was, in fact, a phone call in this timeframe. So, again, I do not consider that evidence of communication.
BY MS. NORRIS:
MS. NORRIS: Based on your familiarity with this case and the evidence in this case, are you aware of any means that Mr. Garcia would have to actually take Mr. Adelson deep sea fishing?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: None that I'm aware of.
MS. NORRIS: In your analysis of the records where there was a lack of communication between Charlie Adelson and Sigfredo Garcia, you were reviewing iCloud, phone records, whatsApp communications, things of that nature?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MS. NORRIS: Are the records that you reviewed consistent with Charlie Adelson's comment at 10:35 a.m. that, no, Tuto did not call him?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They are consistent with that, yes.
MS. NORRIS: May I have one moment, Your Honor?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
MS. NORRIS: Thank you, Sergeant Corbitt. I have no further questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. we'll give Garcia recross, if you desire, on limited subject of State's Exhibit 122 and State's Exhibit 183 and Defense Exhibit 12.
MR. ZANGENEH: Judge, if I may review those.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'm sorry?
MR. ZANGENEH: If I may review those specific --
JUDGE HANKINSON: You want me to tell you what I'm referring to?
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, please, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: The traffic ticket is 122. The 183 and 12 are the iCloud records.
MR. ZANGENEH: Yes, Judge, respectfully.
RECROSS EXAMINATION BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Good morning again, Sergeant.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Good morning.
MR. ZANGENEH: So the traffic ticket that the government showed you this morning was a traffic ticket that my client obtained in a Nissan Sentra; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And that was a Nissan that he rented maybe an hour or so beforehand; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe so, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And that shows that he was driving that car; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It would indicate that, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. And that's because a police officer pulled him over, took his identification, confirmed his identification, and drafted a citation; correct?
MR. ZANGENEH: You'll also agree with me that 36 hours later, Luis Rivera received a citation as well; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: He did, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And he was driving another vehicle; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: That was rented for him; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: well --
MR. ZANGENEH: well, let me rephrase it.
That was rented. But the evidence that we have shows that Luis Rivera was driving; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And that evidence is the citation he received; correct?
MR. ZANGENEH: As well as the cell data that you have with regards to the phone related to Luis Rivera; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, the government showed you some -- sorry.
The government showed you evidence with regards to Charlie Adelson's iCloud; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And icloud evidence only comes from someone that has an account with Apple; correct?
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. So if you have an iPhone or an iPad or a limited variety of communication devices, you'll be able to have an iCloud account; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: You would, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Did Luis Rivera have an iCloud account?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Not that I'm aware of.
MR. ZANGENEH: Did Luis Rivera have an iPhone?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: He did.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, to your knowledge, did Sigfredo Garcia have an icloud account?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: To my knowledge, no.
MR. ZANGENEH: And that's because he did not have an iPhone; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: For the handsets that I looked at, they were not iPhones, correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: But the hand- -- I'm sorry. I just want to make sure.
So the handsets that were associated with my client, they were not iPhones; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The ones that I've spoken about, no, they were not.
MR. ZANGENEH: And the ones that you're spoken -- you're speaking about are the ones that are related to this investigation; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Okay. You'll agree with me that there's -- so okay.
So Luis Rivera has an iPhone; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: He did at one point, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And during -- well, at that point. we're talking about the timeframe of this investigation; is that right?
MR. ZANGENEH: And Charlie Adelson had an iPhone; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: He did.
MR. ZANGENEH: Now, let me ask you this question: Are you familiar of -- are you familiar with FaceTime audio calls?
MR. ZANGENEH: If there was a FaceTime audio call, is that memorialized in the iCloud?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It would not be.
MR. ZANGENEH: So if Luis Rivera did a FaceTime audio call to charlie Adelson, there'd be no record of that; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Let me say I don't believe that that would be recorded. we did not see that, and I'm not sure sitting here exactly when the FaceTime audio calls came in. we're talking about 2014, and I don't know exactly when that service was started.
MR. ZANGENEH: So just so I have that clear, are -- is there a way to capture on an iCloud FaceTime audio calls between iPhone users?
JUDGE HANKINSON: You're talking about the substance of them? Is that what you're asking him, Mr. Zangeneh?
MR. ZANGENEH: No. Just the fact that a call was made on FaceTime audio.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I'm not certain if the FaceTime call would be captured as a call -- as a potential call log, because it does populate in a number of devices as a phone call even though it was conducted over FaceTime. And if it did that, then it would be captured in the cloud.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Did you see a FaceTime audio call -- well, what about FaceTime video calls? Do they show up on call detail reports?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: No, they do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: what about FaceTime audio calls?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: They do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: what about whatsApp?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: In call detail records? No, they do not.
MR. ZANGENEH: what about Telegram messages?
MR. ZANGENEH: Skypes?
MR. ZANGENEH: Signals?
MR. ZANGENEH: And these are all communications that could be made between iPhone users like Luis Rivera and Charlie Adelson; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MS. NORRIS: I object to outside the scope, Your Honor.
MR. ZANGENEH: TI believe they've opened the door with regards to the iCloud, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Let's keep it to the icloud records.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: Counsel for Ms. Magbanua showed corresponding communication between Ms. Magbanua and Mr. Adelson with regards to my client calling Mr. Adelson; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Pretty short back and forth; right?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It was, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And, in essence, the content of it was whether or not my client had reached out to Charlie Adelson; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you indicated when you -- when you were speaking with the government that there's no independent evidence with regards to the numbers associated with Sigfredo and -- with Sigfredo Garcia and Charlie Adelson that any communication took place; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: You agree with me that the contents of this conversation, it appeared that Ms. Magbanua was concerned that my client, Mr. Garcia, was going to reach out to Mr. Adelson; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: It did, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: And you'll also agree with me that it appeared that there was -- there was back and forth between Ms. Magbanua and Mr. Adelson, Mr. Charlie Adelson, as to whether or not someone could find his number on the Internet; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: And this occurred July -- I'm sorry, April 25th.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I believe so, yes.
MR. ZANGENEH: Of 2014; correct?
MR. ZANGENEH: when was the call that Sigfredo Garcia made to Harvey Adelson?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: July 1st.
MR. ZANGENEH: Do you know if Harvey Adelson's phone number -- Dr. Harvey Adelson --
JUDGE HANKINSON: I think we're getting beyond the scope of what I've allowed you recross on, Mr. Zangeneh.
MR. ZANGENEH: This will be my last question, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right.
BY MR. ZANGENEH:
MR. ZANGENEH: You agree with me that the call to Harvey Adelson, Dr. Harvey Adelson, occurred several months after this initial inquiry by Ms. Magbanua; correct?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: That's correct.
MR. ZANGENEH: Nothing further.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Recross On No. 122, State's Exhibit 122?
MR. DECOSTE: No questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Any redirect on Mr. Zangeneh's questions?
MS. NORRIS: NO, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. Any juror have a question? Seems like a long time we've got to you. A question from the jury?
All right. we'll go sidebar.
(Bench Conference was held as follows:)
JUDGE HANKINSON: It's a little long and convoluted, but basically what -- the juror wants to know whether Adelson deleted other messages other than the Magbanua messages. Either side have objection to that?
MR. ZANGENEH: NO.
MR. DECOSTE: No.
MS. NORRIS: NO.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Question: Did he plot the Anthony Ortiz's phone location the morning of July 19th? Then there's a followup question if he did.
Do you know whether he did or not? we'll ask him if he -- if there's no objection.
MR. ZANGENEH: None from Mr. Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: None.
MS. NORRIS: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. And the followup would be, if so, was it consistent with him being near the barber shop that morning? Anybody have objection?
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection from Garcia.
MR. DECOSTE: No.
MS. NORRIS: No.
JUDGE HANKINSON: The question is, was there handset location information during the second Comfort rental on June 3rd, 2014? If so, to explain it. Anybody have objection to that?
MR. ZANGENEH: Well, my concern here is this: That Sergeant Corbitt would be providing hearsay information with regards to the carrier.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I'm not following. we're talking about handset information, same stuff he's done for everybody else.
MR. ZANGENEH: That's fine, Judge. No objection.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
MS. NORRIS: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: And then a second question: As to Garcia and Rivera, was it just the phones that stopped being used or the phone numbers as well?
MR. ZANGENEH: When are they -- what specific timeframe? Are they asking the June timeframe?
JUDGE HANKINSON: They're talking about after the murder. The testimony has been that Garcia and Rivera quit using their phones.
MR. ZANGENEH: Oh, they want to know if Garcia used the same number with a different phone. That's fine.
MR. PADILLA: Or if the handset could continue to be used with another number.
MR. ZANGENEH: No objection.
MR. DECOSTE: No objection.
MS. NORRIS: No objection.
JUDGE HANKINSON: I might have to maybe broaden that out a little bit. So I guess the question would be, do you have evidence of Garcia and Rivera using phones after the homicide? I guess that's the question. If so, what numbers?
MR. ZANGENEH: That's fair.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Good? Okay.
(Bench Conference was concluded.)
JUDGE HANKINSON: You had testified about Charlie Adelson deleting messages that we saw in the iCloud information. Did he just delete Ms. Magbanua's messages or was he deleting many of the messages with other people?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: If I may refer very quickly to that --
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: -- I can probably give a better answer.
JUDGE HANKINSON: You may review that.
(A pause in the proceeding.)
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Obviously, there are a number of events in the icloud, tens of thousands here, so I can filter down to just what has been deleted. And my computer is trying to catch up here, but I see a number of -- yeah.
So, for example, there's communications with another phone number that's not related that has been deleted, at least one. There appear to be multiple deleted text messages with other numbers, other messages that's not related to Ms. Magbanua.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Okay. There was discussion about a phone for Anthony Ortiz. Are you familiar with who I'm referring to?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes, sir, I am.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Did you attempt to plot his phone location for the morning of July 19th, 2014?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: The investigators did not obtain records for that phone number, so I did not have anything to plot for that morning. His activity that we saw is from the records that we did have of Ms. Magbanua, Mr. Rivera, Mr. Garcia.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Was there -- did you do any plotting of the handset locations during the second Comfort rental on June 3rd, 2014?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: During the second Comfort rental?
JUDGE HANKINSON: June 3rd, 2014.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: We did. And I'm -- I apologize, I'm trying to recall. I believe that we looked at that, and I don't know that -- we did not have location records for Mr. Garcia obviously in that timeframe. I did look at Mr. Adelson's records and Ms. Magbanua's records, and I did not see events that would -- were consistent with them going to that location. As the car was just being exchanged, it wasn't necessarily --
MR. ZANGENEH: Objection, Judge, his classification, the car being exchanged; facts not in evidence.
JUDGE HANKINSON: well, that is in evidence. I'1] overrule that objection.
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: I didn't necessarily think that there had to be two persons involved, as opposed if someone was getting dropped off than if you're just going yourself, you may not have to have someone with you so -- but no, I did not find any records for anyone else with locations consistent on that day.
JUDGE HANKINSON: What about in terms of Rivera? Did you look at his handset location for that timeframe?
CHRISTOPHER CORBITT: Yes, sir. I'm sorry if I didn't include it. I did his as well, and it was not consistent.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Those were the questions that were asked. Any followup, Ms. Norris?
MS. NORRIS: One moment, Your Honor.
No questions, Your Honor.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Garcia?
MR. ZANGENEH: No questions, Judge.
JUDGE HANKINSON: Magbanua?
MR. DECOSTE: Just five minutes’ worth.
No questions, Your Honor. No questions.
JUDGE HANKINSON: All right. You can step down, Sergeant.
Call your next witness, please.