Read the Court's reasoning for allowing Zoellner's malicious prosecution claim against Detective Losey to proceed here. This provides background as to what this trial is about and what Zoellner would need to prove to succeed.
These proceedings are being held under US District Judge Jaqueline Scott Corley and are currently scheduled to run from October 3, 2022 until October 12, 2022.
10/13 Update: The jury reached a verdict. Verdict information available here
Proposed Jury Instructions and Verdict Forms
- Document 349 - Proposed Verdict Form
- Document 370 - Final Jury Instructions
Day 1 - October 3, 2022
- Minutes, Trial Sheet, Exhibit and Witness List
- Transcript Volume 1
Day 2 - October 4, 2022
- TRIAL SHEET, EXHIBIT and WITNESS LIST
- Minutes
- Transcript Volume 2 Maggie Fleming and Eric Zoellner testimony (NEW 4/1)
Day 3 - October 5, 2022
- Minutes, Trial Sheet, Exhibit and Witness List
- Transcript Volume 3
Day 4 - October 6, 2022
- Minutes, Trial Sheet, Exhibit and Witness List
- Transcript Volume 4 - Primarily includes the testimony of APD Lieutenant Todd Dockweiler (New 8/28)
Day 5 - October 7, 2022
- Minutes, Trial Sheet, Exhibit and Witness List
- Transcript Volume 5
Day 6 - October 11, 2022
- Minutes, Trial Sheet, Exhibit and Witness List (Both sides rested and the jury began deliberation)
- Transcript Volume 6
Day 7 - Verdict and decision on punitive damages
- Transcript Volume 7
Other Documents:
DEFENDANT’S PROBABLE CAUSE UNDISPUTED FACTS
PLAINTIFF’S UNDISPUTED ADDITIONAL FACTS TO DEFENDANT’S PROBABLE CAUSE UNDISPUTED FACTS
PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS UNDER RULE 37(b)(2)(A)(vi) BY ENTERING A JUDGMENT IN FAVOR PLAINTIFF AND ALLOWING THE JURY TO DECIDE THE AMOUNT OF DAMAGES (Document 350) (Another strongly worded document from Zoellner's counsel)
ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS (Document 355)
Document 362 - Order RE: Completion of Trial
(New 10/10 below)
PLAINTIFF’S BENCH BRIEF: TRIAL MATTERS & ISSUES RELATING TO DISPUTED FACTS FOR PROBABLE CAUSE
- Zoellner's counsel brings up two issues in this document. First, they discuss the disputed facts of the case. They then ask the court for another 1.5 hours of time for direct and cross examination.
- With regard to the facts of the case, they say, in part "...Plaintiff has no dispute as to location of the blood found at the scene, the location of altercation which involved Zoellner and Lawson, lack of blood in the grassy area where the fight took place, the fingerprint result’s from the knife found at the scene which showed it did not match Kyle Zoellner’s, the fiber report that did not match Kyle Zoellner’s clothing, defendant’s had no forensic testing showing blood on Zoellner’s pants came from someone other than Kyle Zoellner, Defendant Losey admitted that his police report relating to Jason Martinez was false allegedly seeing Zoellner stab Lawson... At issue for this Court is applying the standard of proof of preponderance of evidence to the state of the evidence as such that would lead a person of ordinary caution or prudence to believe or conscientiously entertain a strong suspicion of the guilt of the accused. Plaintiff submits there is no probable cause."
ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR MORE TIME
PLAINTIFF’S MEMORANDUM RE PROBABLE CAUSE & REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE
DEFENDANT ERIC LOSEY’S MEMORANDUM RE PROBABLE CAUSE
ORDER RE: LACK OF PROBABLE CAUSE ELEMENT
PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION UNDER RULE 37 AND 11 FOR ISSUE & MONETARY SANCTIONS
Documents regarding Humboldt County District Attorney Maggie Fleming's Testimony
- Document 343 - This is a letter by the counsel for DA Maggie Fleming from 9/30/2022 in which she objects to giving testimony at the Zoellner v. City of Arcata trial.
- Document 345 - This is Zoellner's response to a request by DA Fleming to limit and seal her testimony. This response is very strongly worded by Zoellner's attorney. The following is a quote:
This is yet another attempt to cover up their incompetence and how they actually damaged my client’s reputation in such a way that he was not able to go out and do anything because everybody called him a “killer”, a “murder” all premised on false reports. This Court should not protect, this kind of activity from public eye. It should not protect Ms.Fleming, Detective Losey and Dokweiler from any potential investigations by other agencies into their improper conduct. And sealing records would do just that.
- Document 347 - This is the Court's order denying DA Fleming's request. The Court says the following:
"Non-party Maggie Fleming’s objections to giving testimony at trial are OVERRULED. (Dkt. No. 343.) Ms. Fleming is an experienced lawyer and the elected District Attorney of Humboldt County. She was represented by counsel at her August 2022 deposition, and did not make any of the privilege objections she now raises. Her brief does not address the issue that her deposition testimony waived any privileges that may have applied. Nor does she make a particularized showing that testimony about her charging decision in April 2017 will negatively impact the ongoing investigation more than five years later.
It seems like this document will be central to DA Fleming's testimony. The following quote from this article seems a likely reference to the charging document prepared by former APD Detective Eric Losey who is the defendant in this trial. Zoellner alleges that Losey's misrepresentation of this eyewitnesses statement on this charging document was critical to the DA's decision to charge him with the murder of Josiah Lawson in 2017 and that this amounts to malicious prosecution by Detective Losey. Zoellner seems to suggest that the following quote by DA Fleming in this letter supports this. You can read more about this under Detective Eric Losey and witness Jason Martinez's testimony at the 2017 preliminary hearing in the murder case here.
"Initially, the Arcata Police Department (APD) arrested a suspect at the scene and then submitted to this Office, within a few days of the arrest, reports that indicated an eyewitness could identify the suspect. We filed charges based on that information but at the preliminary hearing that witness could not in fact identify anyone. Extensive testimony at the preliminary hearing, by people in the vicinity at the time of the incident, yielded no witnesses to the actual stabbing."
Transcripts Available here
More documents from the Zoellner v. City of Arcata case are available here
The court's reasoning for dismissing the 2017 murder charges can be read here
Annotated transcripts from the preliminary hearing in the 2017 murder case can be read here