The attorney for Paul Zumot, the Palo Alto man convicted last year of strangling his girlfriend and burning down the Addison Avenue cottage they shared, is arguing in an appeal that Zumot did not receive a fair trial and that the conviction should be overturned.
Cliff Gardner, the attorney representing Zumot, argued in a 120-page appeal that Zumot’s conviction should be reversed because the judge violated the law when he allowed the prosecution to use testimony from the victim, Jennifer Schipsi, as evidence during the trial. Gardner is also arguing that Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge David Cena gave the jury “one-sided and unbalanced instructions” that favored the prosecution.
Zumot was found guilty of murder and arson in February 2011 and sentenced to 33 years to life. During the trial, the prosecution relied heavily on text messages and other cell-phone records to paint a picture of the turbulent relationship between Zumot and Schipsi, a 29-year-old real-estate agent. The message exchanges, along with testimony from witnesses, indicated that Zumot and Schipsi were involved in a major fight in the early morning of Oct. 15, 2009. Later that evening, Palo Alto firefighters and police officers responded to a fire at 969 Addison Ave., which arson investigators later determined was caused by an accelerant. Schipsi’s body was found inside the burned cottage, though a coroner found that her hyoid was broken, suggesting that she was strangled before the fire.
The appeal from Gardner criticizes the judge and the prosecution for violating Zumot’s Sixth Amendment right to “confrontation,” which prohibits “hearsay” testimony in which the person making accusations cannot be cross-examined by defense attorneys. The prosecution relied on an exemption to this rule typically reserved for witnesses in gang-related trials who are prevented by the defendant from presenting their testimony at the trial.
Gardner is arguing in his appeal that the court made a mistake in allowing Schipsi’s statements to be admitted under this “forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exemption.” Under the common law, Gardner wrote, this exemption “applied only to the unavailable witness who had made statements or given a testimony at a prior proceeding.” Gardner wrote that Schipsi had not testified or made statements against Zumot at any prior proceeding.
“Admission of the unconfronted hearsay was, therefore, not justified by the forfeiture-by-wrongdoing exception,” Gardner wrote in the appeal. “Because Mr. Zumot had no opportunity to confront this evidence, admission of the evidence violated his constitutional right to confrontation.”
The statements include comments Schipsi made to Palo Alto police officers in August 2009, shortly after she and Zumot had a fight. She told the officers about Zumot’s “shady thought process” and “infatuation with murder” and asked for an emergency restraining order, which was granted. She also told police that Zumot had planned to burn down his University Avenue hookah shop, Da Hookah Spot, and collect the insurance money.
Gardner also argued that testimony about Zumot’s history of domestic violence should not have been used to determine whether he had killed Schipsi. The prosecution’s extensive discussion of Zumot’s prior incidents of domestic violence, coupled with what Gardner called the judge’s “conflicting instructions” to the jury about how this evidence can be used, violated due process, the appeal states. Gardner wrote that it is “universally recognized that erroneous admission of uncharged offenses is highly prejudicial.”
“This is especially true here,” the appeal states. “The state’s case rested almost entirely on the prior incidents of domestic violence in conjunction with evidence that Mr. Zumot and Ms. Schipsi argued on the day she was killed. The defense case rested almost entirely on Mr. Zumot’s testimony that he was completely innocent and had nothing to do with Ms. Schipsi’s murder. Evidence that Mr. Zumot had prior incidents of domestic violence involving his girlfriend Ms. Schipsi from which the jury could infer he was guilty of murder was devastating to his case.”
Gardner is also arguing that Judge Cena’s instructions to the jury had “undercut the presumption of innocence and the right to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” The court, Gardner wrote, told the jury that the prosecution had to prove that Zumot was involved in the prior incidents by a “preponderance of evidence” standard — a lower bar than the “beyond the reasonable doubt” standard required for a murder conviction.
The court also instructed the jury that once the prosecution has proven the prior incidents, the jury could infer from these incidents whether the defendant is likely to commit and “did commit” murder. The jury, Gardner wrote, “was effectively told that the finding of criminal disposition — from which guilt cold be inferred — need only to be proved by a preponderance of evidence.” The incidents, which the jury heard about during the trial, include episodes in which Zumot had spat at Schipsi, hit her car, threatened her and flooded her with hundreds of text messages.
“Of course, the ultimate determination of guilt was one in which the state had the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt,” Gardner wrote. “Because the combination of instructions permitted the jury to make this determination based on evidence which the state was only required to prove by a preponderance of the evidence, due process was violated.”
The opening brief from Zumot’s attorney was filed in the state’s Sixth Appellate District, which represents Santa Clara, San Benitez and Santa Cruz counties. The respondent’s brief in this case has not yet been filed.
Zumot, 38, was represented during the trial by high-profile attorney Mark Geragos, whose previous clients included Michael Jackson and Winona Ryder. Zumot fired Geragos shortly before the sentence hearing in the fall of 2011.
Gardner also criticized the trial court for failing to assign Zumot a public defender after learning that Geragos was fired. Attorney Tina Glandian, part of Geragos’ legal team, represented Zumot during the sentencing.
Gardner wrote that the court’s refusal to either appoint a public defender or continuing the sentencing to another day so that Zumot could retain new counsel “deprived Mr. Zumot of his right to the effective assistance of counsel at sentencing.”
Zumot is serving his sentence at the Calipatria State Prison in Imperial County, according to the state Department of Corrections.
Related story:
He is right where he needs to be – hope he is having fun. Lots of luck on overturning that conviction! Ain’t gonna happen…
Zumot, you were found guilty with an overwhelming amount of evidence….
“case closed”. No more smoking hookah for u
If someone is going to take Zumot’s remaining money it should be the victim’s family, not some greedy SOB lawyer who knows damn well he is not going to get anywhere.
Anon….amen on that! The victims family deserves monetary compensation at the very least for this terrible, tragedy. The loss of a daughter it must be devastating.
FAT CHANCE!
Follow Shakespeare’s advice re: lawyers.
Where do those guys find the time to write a 120 page appeal?
Not going to happen. Get used to prison the REST of your sorry life.
Wait!!!
Are we sure he is paying attorney fees out of his own pocket?
I hope its not my honest earned tax $$ paying for it…
Of course its your tax money, idiot !
he will be free… the prosecution and the judge were trying to get a convectiion agains him at any cost… they even (judge and the prosecution)violating Zumot’s Sixth Amendment right to “confrontation,” which prohibits “hearsay” testimony in which the person making accusations cannot be cross-examined by defense attorneys. they got the wrong guy while the real killer still out there free… zumot is an innocent man and should get a chance for a fair trail..
Giving the money to Jennifer’s family? Why, the family wants to continue to keep her legacy alive by scamming men and stealing their money? As for the hearsay rule, I find it amazing that in a country that prides itself of its civil and human rights not only allows hearsay in its court rooms but also allows the admittance of the words of a woman that it knows was a liar and made her living out of lying and accusing innocent men of things they did not do. Jennifer is known in our society for lying to get what she wants, and lying about her father’s health and claiming that he had a late stage of cancer when he didn’t and lying about her degree, claiming that she had a degree in psychology when she was a high school drop out are the biggest proof of what type of person she was. Also, the court and judge Cena allowed the admittance of her false accusations against Paul but hid her accusations of domestic violence and restraining orders against other men like the two brothers, Raj, and Jake from the jury. We are so proud of this justice system.
Paul is innocent and will be free because the truth is stronger than lies and JUSTICE will always prevail in the end.
Judge Cena also allowed the admittance of Jennifer’s false accusations against Paul but did not allow the admittance of her retractions. Every time Jennifer went to court and lied about Paul, she went back and legally filed declarations that she had lied and that Paul had never threatened to hurt her. She ALWAYS went back and told the police that she lied about Paul because she was jealous or “emotionally disturbed” at the time.
Judge Cena was aware of all of these things but hid them from the jury and took everything to the the chambers so that no errors can be recorded against him. Judge Cena, where and how are you going to face the Big Judge, God the Almighty one day?
Justice and Freedom for Paul.
Sure, some other abusive boyfriend came after these two argued and killed her and burned down the cottage. What a coincidence, eh? As David Pepperdine said above, “FAT CHANCE!”
First you kill someone, then they use her own words to nail you and you want to confront her? The irony makes me reel.
I hope he rots.
It is unconstitutional to use hearsay in the court of law, and assertions must be subject to cross-examination.
http://paulzumot.com/Jennifer-Schipsi.html
Jennifer always went back to court and admitted that she lied. All her retractions are provided here.
http://paulzumot.com/Jennifer-Schipsi.html
I am not a lawyer, but I know that when an appeal is submitted it has to rely heavily on the court records of what was said during the trial by the defendant, the witnesses and the judge. If what is written in this article is what is mentioned in the appeal, don’t you think that Paul’s constitutional rights to be found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt was violated? Last time I checked Palo Alto is in America not somewhere in the f*** Middle East . Use your Brain
No body is above the law. Not Cena, DA or any other. They abused their power once, but justice finally will prevail. Thats why there is appeal; appeal is an expression of injustice, abuse of power and prejudice . You can hope whatever you like ; you are entitled to wish anything ; whether you rot in your toilet or somewherelse ! but whether you like it, or not, your mama likes it, or not, justice will prevail and Paul will be a free man !
Definitely this was not “beyond a reasonable doubt” conviction, and hearsay should have never been used in court. The reason why the prosecution relied heavily on hearsay is because they had no evidence against Paul and had to resort to hearsay and character assassination to convict him. May justice prevail in this case and always.
Hearsay is NOT real evidence. If the DA had anything against Paul, he would have used it. But when in the end he found out that he was losing the case, he dragged the trial until January of 2011 to be able to use the new 1390 rule. Had he had any evidence against Paul, he wouldn’t have needed to use hearsay. Actually, using hearsay in court is very primitive and indicative of backwardness and ignorance. This is even worse than being in a third-world country.
Gardner will arguing Zumot’s appeal down to the family’s last dime. Each page in the appeal is probably worth $250 to Gardner.
Even if the appeal goes through, they’d try him again and he still be convicted. There is plenty of evidence that he did it. The murderer must be having a miserable time in that hell hole.
paul is going free and the lord will prevail
It’s interesting that allegedly local commenters have popped up in multipliciy on this subject, but aren’t regular commenters. They also appear to know a lot about this particular case, but won’t admit how they know or how they’re related to Zumot. Interesting. I bet they won’t be posting on other subjects!
As much as this is a tragic story for the couple and their families, and there is no winner any way, but he who laughs last, his laugh lasts !
When Paul is out, you will remember what I have said !
I recall a plethora of spurious Zumot-supporter comments on news stories during the original trial. Wonder whether they all come from the same IP address…
Agree with you Hmmm. Most likely the same person by some of the punctuation. Maybe the same one who put up the “Free Paul” website that drags the murder victim through the mud (other relationships, medications, plastic surgeries) and makes accusations to everyone but that angel Paul Zumot. The website and the videos that the victim’s family pulled down don’t even make any sense. Shameful!
Our court system is an embarrassment to our country. Even in third-world countries hearsay is not allowed to be used in the courtroom, let alone for a first-degree murder. And we dare to call ourselves an “advanced” nation? We are not, we are more backwards than others used to be during the Dark Ages. We should be ashamed of ourselves!
Jennifer exaggerates. Many crimes in 3rd world nations never get a complaint filed on, much less heard in court. Some of these countries legally allow women to be beaten & murdered. I’ll take our justice system over one of those, even if it’s far from perfect. And speaking of perfect, this murder. Ictim was far from it, but that’s not the point – she was still a crime victim & we the people speak FOR her through our prosecutors.
And it’s *alleged* hearsay, Jennifer. But you know that.
What’s the deal w/using the handle Jennifer Belfari, anyway? I understand the reference but don’t get why- but it’s tacky.
When someone states they are innocent I always wonder why they don’t want to take the lie detector test to clear their name. If I were accused of something I didn’t do I would want to take the test to prove it. When an innocent person refuses the lie detector test I have to wonder. You also have to wonder who would strangle a person- this is a crime of passion. So someone slipped in after Zumot left in the morning and strangled her before she went to work. Hmmmm. I think beyond a reasonable doubt was proved. My suggestion for Zumot is to take the lie detector and spend his money finding the real killer to prove his innocence if he truly loved this woman he would want to find the killer. If he doesn’t want to do these things then the guilty verdict stands.
Lie detector tests are no more useful at determining innocence than throwing someone in the lake to see if they float. What if that neuroscience grad student guy in Colorado passed a lie detector test saying he didn’t do it? You keep trying new polygraphers until you get the answer you want.
How often do innocent people flunk polygraph tests? Is it common?
Do the crime…Do your time. Found guilty – Case closed
I doubt that I could pass if the police arrested me and claimed my fingerprints and other evidence were all over the scene of the crime and I knew they were determined to convict me. On the other hand if I were guilty I’d be mentally prepared and would have nothing to lose. Various miscreants and transnational spies are very good at defeating the test. Jorge Hernandez wouldn’t have had a chance.
“Found guilty beyond reasonable doubt” ! Impressive ! Iraq was found to have WMD and beyond reasonable doubt that hundreds of thousands of Iraqi’s were butchered ! All what you care about is DRAMA, you biggots !
I just looked up Calipatria State Prison on Google Earth. It’s just east of the Salton Sea, a huge bowl of toxic soup, and not to far from the Mexico border. Having been through that area a few times on my way to San Felipe, I can say the location in just down the road from Hell.
From Wikipedia:
Highlights:
…it had a design capacity of 2,308 but a total institution population of 4,180, for an occupancy rate of 181.1 percent.
As of 1995, CAL’s problems included “double-celling” (placing two inmates in bunk beds in a cell designed for one), psychological stress, a drastic shortage of work for prisoners, chronic understaffing among prison employees, and gang violence.
…very hot in summer– up to 118 degrees Fahrenheit.
The smell of cow manure pervades the prison and the entire area due to large cattle feed lots neaby.
Facilities
Although located about 3 miles (4.8 km) from the center of Calipatria, the prison is within the city limits. Called the lowest prison in the Western Hemisphere, it lies 184 feet (56 m) below sea level. As of Fiscal Year 2005/2006, CAL had a total of 1,143 staff and an annual operating budget of $123 million.
The facility covers a total of 1,227.5 acres (496.8 ha) (with the prison on 300 acres (120 ha)). As of September 2007, it had a design capacity of 2,308 but a total institution population of 4,180, for an occupancy rate of 181.1 percent. Over 2,000 of its housing units are maximum-security Level IV (“Cells, fenced or walled perimeters, electronic security, more staff and armed officers both inside and outside the installation”); the remainder are minimum-security Level I (“Open dormitories without a secure perimeter”).
History
CAL opened in January 1992, approximately 22 months before California State Prison, Centinela (the other state prison in Imperial County). A $1.5 million electrified fence, which could cause instantaneous death for escaping inmates and which was the first of its kind among California state prisons, was installed in November 1993. After a number of birds had died by electrocution, an ornithologist was hired to help redesign the fence and eliminate the problem.
As of 1995, CAL’s problems included “double-celling” (placing two inmates in bunk beds in a cell designed for one), psychological stress, a drastic shortage of work for prisoners, chronic understaffing among prison employees, and gang violence. A May 1995 incident in which five inmates stabbed and assaulted eight officers”was described in 1997 as the worst inmate attack on staff in California state prisons in recent years.[7]
The weather in the area is desert-like, cold in winter and very hot in summer– up to 118 degrees Fahrenheit. The smell of cow manure pervades the prison and the entire area due to large cattle feed lots neaby.
Angelo Buono, Jr. (also known as the Hillside Strangler) died at CAL in September 2002 of a “massive heart attack.”
An August 2005 riot at CAL was the most violent uprising at the prison. The event left 25 inmates and 25 prison staff members wounded. A guard shot and killed an inmate with a Mini-14 semiautomatic rifle, which was believed to have contributed to ending the violence. A spokesman for the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation stated that the disturbance involved Hispanic gang members.”
Sounds like an excellent place. I’m surprised that California would have a place like this, but I think it’s too much for a common murderer.
Justice and poetic justice could both be served if we locked up the employers of illegal aliens there.
In most Middle Eastern countries women are considered the property of their fathers/husbands/brothers. “Honor” killing, when women are murdered for “violating: the family honor are common and not punished. The murderer will usually be a brother, father or husband. Violating family honor is not confined to having an affair with another man. It can occur even if the woman only smiles at another man or touches him innocently. From what I read about the relationship of that couple, Zumult had considered her as his property and beat her up frequently. If this had happened in his native Jordan he would very likely be free and never even charged.
daniel: your racist remarks show who you are ! Paul never touched or harmed the victim . It is only what you like to believe .The victim had the habit of reporting to police of any small harrassment she claims to have faced, if she was ever beaten, she would have reported it. . Go and clean your sick society from natives like Holmes or McVeh before trashing other countries and its people !