Home Scandal and Gossip Kim Pham trial to proceed. ‘She’s not the good girl you think...

Kim Pham trial to proceed. ‘She’s not the good girl you think she is….’

SHARE
Kim Pham trial
Two women indicted for second degree murder have argued that Kim Pham was the aggressor and were only responding to the force she first used against them.

Two women, Candace Marie Brito, 27, and Vanesa Tapia Zavala, 25, indicted for the murder of 23 year old Kim Pham are to now stand trial after a Californian judge ruled that there was enough evidence to proceed with a trial against the two women.

At the time of Orange County Superior Court Judge Thomas Borris‘s ruling, both women remained unmoved as they were remanded in custody in lieu of $1 million bail.

Kim Pham preliminary hearing: She threw the first punch.

Kim Pham started the fight say defense attorneys

Kim Pham funeral. 3 days before her wedding anniversary.

Why didn’t anyone help Kim Pham? Are bystanders guilty?

Candace Marie Brito charged over Kim Pham death: ‘This is a witch hunt!’

Cops must decide today whether to charge second Kim Pham suspect.

Kim Pham father, Dung Pham wants to forget the grief.

Kim Pham investigation stalled. No one wants to come forward.

New Kim Pham murder suspect identified. Picture released.

Vanesa Tapia Zavala insists Kim Pham threw the first punch. 

Vanessa Tapia Zavala charged with the murder of Kim Pham. ‘I’m not guilty.’

Kim Pham was killed because she cut line.

Kim Pham blog last entry: Be bold go forward and live like hell.

Kim Pham attacker arrested after nightclub argument. Too beautiful to be killed?

During the pretrial hearing, Britos’ lawyer, Michael Molfetta told that he was sufficiently pleased that the ‘tiara’ was now off Kim Pham and that the court could now see her as the ‘instigator’ that she was. The claim goes against the notion that Kim Pham had merely been an innocent party to a melee that had escalated whilst her ‘aggressors’ acted without provocation.

The suggestion that Kim Pham was the real aggressor came as cops testified that witnesses told them that Pham had been the first to throw punches after a verbal altercation had gotten out of hand. There was also suggestion that Kim Pham had been drinking but her blood alcohol level was not indicated.

Told Molfetta: ‘What you have is a series of blows. You don’t know which one caused death,’

Adding later: ‘At best this is a manslaughter case.’

Nevertheless video of the incident played during court clearly showed the two indicted women punching and kicking Kim Pham, with one video frame showing Pham on the ground enduring a final kick to the head from Zavala before going motionless.

A pathologist who testified said Pham died from blunt-force trauma, but could not say whether it resulted from a punch, kick or from having her head slammed on the pavement.

During testimony, defense attorneys accused Santa Ana Det. Leo Rodriguez of making up his mind about their clients’ guilt before collecting all the evidence. Zavala’s lawyer said that when his client told police that an ‘Asian girl’ punched her in the face, the detective waited four days to take photos of her injuries.

‘You’re not supposed to take sides when you’re doing that job,’  told Kenneth Reed, Zavala’s attorney.

That said it is now becoming apparent that the two indicted women will seek to argue that they were only acting in self defense when they struck back at Kim Pham after she took to first hurling punches.

Nevertheless the question on most lips is did the two women go beyond the call for action when they continued to pummel into Pham as she by then lay on the ground? At what point can one claim they are acting in self defense and are now the aggressors themselves? And importantly how does the law make such distinctions?

Contemplated, the victim’s brother, Andy Pham: ‘People in society should know that when they commit a crime, there’s a punishment,’

To which Michael Molfetta retorted:  ‘I don’t think any of us are closer to knowing what happened that night,’

‘when it happened and why it happened.’

That said it is up to the court now to decide why or what happened necessitated the degree of vicious response that it did and what that suggests about a society that chooses to resort to blind violence at the prompting of discord.

 

SHARE
Like Scallywagvagabond on Facebook    

3 COMMENTS

  1. Good point. One witness testifies that one of the girl was waiting to get her kick in while Pham was on ground and then she kicked Pham on the head. That could be argued as premeditated murder.

  2. I think a key fact is missing here, the detective said the 2 girls (and their friends) left and returned to confront Pham again. This is after the initial verbal confrontation from the bump. Pham was waiting in line so it wasn’t hard for these girls to find her again. It’s after they returned that the fight broke out in which Pham was said to have punch one of them.

    In my opinion that means the girls made up their mind (after some time) to return and confront Pham. If there was any threat from Pham this ended after they left and she didn’t follow them. But the girls returned with the intent of an altercation. Thus they did intend to fight her by returning and this makes it no longer a case of self-defense. By coming back it makes it premeditated so this could be seen as murder even if they didn’t intend to kill her. They knew they wanted to continue a fight, they were angry and upset and ended up killing Pham. Not an accident by any means so I don’t think manslaughter sticks here.

    Also doesn’t matter if Pham is a good girl or not. No one deserves to die like this.

Comments are closed.