Unity Seen as Vital for 3 Teens on Trial

Two years after they were charged with raping an unconscious 16-year-old girl, the three teenagers remain in lock-step; they haven’t plea-bargained, they won’t testify against one another, and they still chat during breaks in their ongoing trial.

Their lawyers, too, present a united front. Some might question whether they have any choice, inasmuch as one defendant’s wealthy father -- a high-ranking Orange County sheriff’s official -- is helping pay the legal fees for all three suspects.

But lawyers representing Gregory Scott Haidl, 18, Kyle Joseph Nachreiner, 19, and Keith James Spann, 19, say that fact has not compromised any of the defendants’ chances.

“We’ve carried the load of cost in this case,” said Joseph G. Cavallo, Haidl’s lead attorney. “Still, everyone’s priority is their own clients. It’s just that Greg’s interests and Kyle’s interests and Keith’s interests all intertwine.”

The three teens, who all lived in Rancho Cucamonga at the time, are accused of raping the girl in the early morning of July 6, 2002, at the Corona del Mar home of Orange County Assistant Sheriff Don Haidl. Prosecutors say the boys took turns raping or sexually assaulting the allegedly unconscious girl with objects such as a Snapple bottle, a pool cue and a lighted cigarette, and that Gregory Haidl videotaped the encounter.

It is not uncommon for defendants to cut deals with prosecutors in exchange for reduced sentences, even if it means testifying against a friend or family member. But sometimes there are advantages to sticking together, attorneys say.

Legal experts said it’s not unusual for one defendant, or a family, to pick up some or all of the cost of a co-defendant’s attorney to make sure that everyone has strong representation. In the rape case, attorneys declined to reveal what portion of the legal costs Haidl is paying.

“A sloppy defense for a co-defendant can bring you down,” said defense attorney Harland W. Braun. “But if you have a lawyer with integrity, their duty is to the client, not the person that’s paying the money.”

When representing actor Robert Blake on murder charges, Braun defended to the media Blake’s decision to pay the $1-million bail for his bodyguard, charged with conspiracy, as well as pay for the bodyguard’s lawyer.

“If prosecutors can bribe defendants with lesser sentences so they testify against each other, let’s not get too sensitive about one defendant paying for another’s lawyer,” Braun said. “The idea of Haidl paying for lawyers for defendants who can’t afford it is minor.”

Former federal prosecutor Laurie Levenson agreed it is ethical for one defendant to pay for another’s lawyer. She said it can be difficult in some cases for defendants’ families to make unbiased legal decisions out of loyalty toward whoever is helping pay the bills.

“It creates an emotional, mental tie, even though there’s not a legal ethical conflict,” said Levenson, a professor at Loyola Law School. “It creates a conflict of the heart.”

Peter Morreale, the Riverside lawyer representing Spann, said he resents the implication that the defense lawyers are united because Don Haidl has bought them off. Identical charges call for a shared defense strategy, he said.

Placing blame on the others would do no good in this case, he said, because the video clearly shows who does what and when. The jurors will see more divergence in the lawyers’ arguments during closing arguments as they try to distinguish their clients from each other, he said.

“A lot of the separation in the closing argument will really stem from the roots from which these kids sprang,” Morreale said. “The prosecutor and the media have painted all these kids with the same brush, so we have to dispel that belief.”

People have assumed that his client and Nachreiner come from well-off families because Don Haidl is wealthy, he said.

Spann was raised by a single mother who held minimum-wage jobs all her life, Morreale said. When not in court, Spann, who graduated after the incident, now works at a fast-food restaurant. His mother drops him off and picks him up because they can’t afford a second car.

Spann’s grandmother or aunt accompanies him to court. His mother can’t watch, because she’ll be called as a witness.

The family borrowed money for Spann’s bail, and they’ve borrowed more to pay legal fees. But Don Haidl has helped underwrite the “staggering” litigation costs by paying for experts and investigation, Morreale said.

“My client doesn’t have money,” Morreale said. “To defend a case of this magnitude, you have to have money.”

Haidl has also helped Spann buy court clothes, but none of that financial support will influence Morreale’s duty to his client, he said. “I hope that those other boys prevail, but I’ve got to be most concerned for this kid,” the lawyer said.

The lawyer for Nachreiner, a varsity baseball player in high school whose parents have watched every minute of every court hearing, is veteran attorney John Barnett. Known for his meticulous trial preparation, he has triumphed in several cases involving video evidence, including the acquittal of one of the Los Angeles police officers accused of beating Rodney G. King and two deadlocked juries for the Inglewood officer accused of assaulting a teenage boy.

Since the trial started May 3, the defense lawyers have presented similar arguments -- albeit with contrasting courtroom styles. Barnett and Cavallo wrestle over who questions witnesses first, with the winner being whoever stands up faster after the prosecutor has finished.

Barnett is direct and usually the quickest: His opening statement was about an hour shorter than Cavallo’s and 20 minutes shorter than Morreale’s. But his questions are pointed, and he often lopes to the witness stand to challenge inconsistencies toting copies of the witnesses’ testimony or other people’s statements.

Addressing witnesses, Cavallo switches between warm and aggressive, typically starting by asking if he can address them by their first name. If he has questioned them at a prior hearing, he’ll tell them it’s nice to see them again.

His questioning can sometimes appear hostile, however, when he asks witnesses things seemingly more for jury effect than for an answer.

“Did Jane Doe tell you she had had sex four times before the July 6 incident?” he asked last week of Patricia Young, a nurse who examined the girl three days after the encounter. “Uh, no,” Young said.

“Did she tell you she had had sex with three different boys the day before?” Cavallo asked. No, Young said.

In contrast, Morreale is almost folksy, apologizing for his graphic language while presenting his opening narrative about his client’s sexual history with the girl. Despite the differences in their approaches, their defense is the same: The sex was consensual, and the girl was faking unconsciousness. It’s only logical that they remain united, legal experts and the defense attorneys said, given the video evidence. “We’re in this for all of the defendants,” Cavallo said. “They got here together, and they’ll leave together.”