Man Convicted Second Time in Murder of Girl

Former Death Row inmate Rodney James Alcala, granted a new trial in a 1984 state Supreme Court ruling, was again found guilty by an Orange County jury on Wednesday of murdering a 12-year-old Huntington Beach girl.

“I just thank God,” said Robin Samsoe’s mother, Marianne Frazier, who was in court when the verdict was read. “Maybe now my daughter can go to sleep for the first time in seven years. Maybe the rest of my family can go back to life.”

The verdict in Orange County Superior Court followed a four-week trial and four days of jury deliberation, in which the six-man, six-woman jury also found that special circumstances existed because the girl was murdered during a kidnaping.

Alcala, 41, who is in custody in Orange County Jail, was ordered to return to court June 9, when the jury is to recommend either the death penalty or prison without the possibility of parole.

Last Seen Near Pier

Robin was last seen at about 3:15 p.m. on June 20, 1979, near the Huntington Beach Pier. She had spent the day in the area with a friend, Bridgett Wilvert, mostly in the Sunset Beach area, where, according to Wilvert, they were approached by a man who wanted to take their picture.

Later, Robin rode Wilvert’s bicycle to her ballet class. She was not seen again.

Alcala, a Monterey Park part-time photographer, was arrested July 24, 1979, after police received information that Alcala matched a composite drawing based on a description by Wilvert.

Physical evidence found in Alcala’s rented storage locker in Seattle, Wash., showed he had been taking pictures at Sunset Beach that day. The Wilvert girl and a second witness, Jackye Young, identified Alcala as the man who took the pictures.

Alcala was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to die. But two years ago, the state Supreme Court overturned the ruling and then barred prosecutors from using certain evidence, such as Alcala’s criminal past, which included separate incidents in which he held three young girls against their will. In two of those cases, he had beaten them into unconsciousness.

‘Inflamatory Impact’

The Supreme Court ruled that the information about his past had an “inflamatory impact” on the jury and that there were not enough similarities between the earlier attacks and Robin’s slaying to waive the general rule that prosecutors may not refer to a defendant’s criminal past.

Frazier said on Wednesday that she had believed the jury would return a guilty verdict but, “I was also scared that they wouldn’t because of all the evidence the district attorney couldn’t use because of the Supreme Court.”

Keith Monroe of Santa Ana, one of Alcala’s attorneys, said the defense intends to appeal the conviction.