Alberto Alvarez murder trial submitted to jury

Comparing the defense summation to the Wizard of Oz, a San Mateo County prosecutor implored jurors in the Alberto Alvarez murder case not to be swayed by defense tactics to portray slain East Palo Alto police Officer Richard May as a rogue cop out to kill their client.

“This is no different than 1939 and The Wizard of Oz. Ignore the man behind the curtain,” Steve Wagstaffe, San Mateo County senior deputy district attorney, said Tuesday, the final day of arguments — after which the jury of six men and six women began deliberations.

Weeks of emotion and exhaustion etched the lawyers’ faces. Spectators in the packed courtroom wept as an image of Alvarez’s arm, with bruises sustained after being struck by the officer’s baton, was projected on the courtroom wall, side by side with an image of the slain officer lying in a pool of blood.

“Does this bruise justify this?” Wagstaffe asked, punching home 5 1/2 weeks of testimony during which he portrayed Alvarez as a cold-blooded killer.

Alvarez, 26, of Redwood City, admitted he shot and killed the officer during a foot pursuit on Jan. 7, 2006, but claims he did so in self-defense.

Much of the trial focused on whether the officer used excessive force when he hit Alvarez from behind with a metal baton, then shot the fleeing suspect in the leg, provoking his own death.

Alvarez, a convicted felon in possession of a firearm, claims he killed the officer out of fear for his life. But prosecutors said he shot the officer in order to avoid a lengthy prison sentence for being a felon with a gun.

After firing several shots and causing the officer to fall to the ground, Alvarez “executed” May after he lay on a residential driveway off Weeks Street, Wagstaffe said.

The burden of proof is on the prosecution to show Alvarez killed the officer with intention and deliberation — malice aforethought — which could bring a first-degree murder verdict. If convicted, a special-circumstance charge of killing an officer who is performing his lawful duties could get Alvarez a death sentence.

But Alvarez did not have enough time to deliberate his actions, which took a mere 7 seconds, lead defense attorney Charles Robinson said Monday during his closing arguments. He argued for second-degree murder or even manslaughter if Alvarez is convicted, which could bring anywhere from a life sentence (if special allegations are attached) to several decades in prison for a lesser conviction, according to Eric Liberman, co-defense attorney.

Wagstaffe refuted the timing on Tuesday. Alvarez’s actions point to premeditation, he said.

“Go by the defendant’s own description of things: He’s shot in the leg; he fumbled with the gun … he leaned over against the car and fired. No matter what scenario — it’s thinking.

“He comes back and sees if the officer is still alive. His mental state is, ‘I want to kill this man. I want to finish him off.’ That’s hard — that’s hard for any of us to listen to — that the officer might still be alive.

“Well, he was alive.

“Why else would he take his gun out? For funsies, to shoot into a corpse?” Wagstaffe said.

Wagstaffe played a recording of one of May’s last radio calls, calmly telling dispatch he is following Alvarez.

“He’s running from me,” May said, his voice level.

These are not the words of an officer suddenly turned homicidal maniac, bent on killing an innocent man, Wagstaffe said.

“Listen to Richard May’s words; don’t listen to my words,” Wagstaffe said.

Within seconds, Officer May was dead.

No one will ever know what was in the officer’s mind or what he saw because he cannot speak for himself, Wagstaffe said.

“Do not give the defendant the advantage” because he is alive and can give his version of the story. Alvarez deserves a first-degree murder conviction with special circumstances, Wagstaffe said.

“May “isn’t just somebody who died in our community. He’s somebody who died for his community,” he said.