Key Issue in Murder Trial: Blame for Robber’s Death : Courts: Closing arguments focus on whether the suspect is responsible for his partner being shot to death by one of their victims.

A 26-year-old man is “guilty as sin” of trying to rob a fabric store in Little Saigon but is not to blame for the death of his partner, who was shot by a store employee during the crime, the man’s attorney said Tuesday.

But the prosecutor, who is pushing for a murder conviction against Dung Van Mai, said the brutal circumstances of the incident mean that the defendant is “fully responsible for what occurred.”

The attorneys’ statements came during closing arguments in the 2-week trial against Mai, who, in an unusual twist, is charged with first-degree murder for his partner’s death, even though he was not the triggerman.

Prosecutors contend that Mai’s violent behavior during the June 28, 1991, robbery bid “provoked” the victims into defending themselves and led to the death of Bao Hoang Lau, 27, of San Gabriel. Under state law, a defendant can be charged with murder if, during the course of a crime, his actions and behavior aggravate the situation, inciting a deadly response.

In addition to the murder charge, Mai is charged with four counts of robbery and one count of false imprisonment.

Both the prosecutor and defense attorney agree that Mai and Lau entered the Westminster fabric shop, which also served as a gold exchange and had at least $100,000 in gold on hand, with the intent to rob it. But the attorneys differ on whether Mai’s actions led to a fatal gun battle between the bandits and a store employee.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Jeoffrey L. Robinson argued that Mai “acted like a crazed maniac” during the attempted robbery. He said the defendant walked into the family-run business on Bolsa Avenue and assaulted the “matriarch,” Ly Nguyen.

Mai pushed the mother and the others to the floor, kicking, hitting and pistol-whipping them, Robinson said. All the while, he screamed profanities at the family and shouted, “I’m going to shoot you! I’m going to kill!” according to Robinson.

Mai told his partner, Lau, to get duct tape to bind the victims, whom he had stacked on top of each other, face down on the floor, Robinson said.

“Mr. Mai did everything he could to provoke what happened,” the prosecutor said.

Robinson said the victims “thought they were going to be executed.”

But Nguyen’s son, Thanh, struggled with Mai and wrested his gun away in a dramatic attempt to save his family, Robinson said.

“It was a superhuman feat to get up and get the gun, and thank God he did,” Robinson said.

As Thanh Nguyen fought with Mai, Nguyen’s other son, Quy, a store employee, went for a gun hidden in a desk drawer, Robinson said. He fatally shot Lau, who was aiming his own gun at him, then shot and wounded Mai, the prosecutor said.

Mathew S. Vallance, Mai’s attorney, told the jury during his closing argument that his client is “guilty of those robberies, no doubt about it. Guilty as sin.

“This was a horrible, horrible incident,” Vallance said.

He also said the victims had acted appropriately in defending themselves. “If it had been me and I had a chance to get a gun and shoot them, I would have too,” he said.

But the right of victims to defend themselves does not mean that Mai is guilty of murder, argued Vallance, who said Mai was acting like a robber, not a murderer.

“Pointing a gun at a feeble old lady is not a provocative act. It’s a horrible thing to do, but the thing is, it’s not a murder,” he said.

Vallance told the jury that Mai had to do something “in addition” to the acts of a robbery to provoke a deadly response and be charged with murder.

Robinson countered in his rebuttal that Mai’s actions aggravated the situation “beyond” a normal robbery.

The jury will begin its deliberations today.