Criminalist Contradicts Rathbun’s Testimony

In testimony that brought an audible rush of emotion from the family and friends of Linda Sobek, a Sheriff’s Department criminalist said Tuesday that photos showing the nude torso of a woman do not match those taken in an autopsy of the former model.

The statement by prosecution witness Heidi Robbins directly contradicts the testimony of photographer Charles Rathbun, who is on trial for allegedly sodomizing and slaying Sobek, 27, of Hermosa Beach, during a photo shoot last November in the Angeles National Forest.

Moreover, Robbins’ testimony suggested that the provocative photos Rathbun claimed to have taken of Sobek were a fake, and Deputy Dist. Atty. Steve Kay said a criminal investigation was underway to determine who may have manufactured the photos. Last week, Rathbun’s brother testified that he found the undeveloped photos in film canisters in the forest months after his brother’s arrest. Robert Rathbun, an attorney, also testified that he is an amateur photographer and developed the film himself before it was turned over to authorities.

Without offering any specifics on the scope of the investigation, Kay said it did not include Rathbun’s attorney, Mark Werksman. “I don’t believe he’s involved,” Kay said.

Robbins’ testimony began shortly after Rathbun left the witness stand. On Tuesday, he conceded that he could not account for severe abrasions to Sobek’s ankles.

During his 2 1/2 days of testimony, the 39-year-old photographer steadfastly maintained that he accidentally killed Sobek while trying to subdue her during an argument that followed a near-accident in a driving stunt. That argument, he said, followed an afternoon of drinking and consensual sex with Sobek, whom Rathbun also claimed to have photographed both in dresses and nude.

But the photographs of a nude torso did not match those of Sobek’s autopsy, criminalist Robbins told the nine-man, three-woman jury in Torrance, showing them photo enlargements.

“The [nude] woman depicted . . . is not Linda Sobek,” Robbins testified in a statement that drew an excited stir from Sobek’s family and friends, seated in the first two rows of the courtroom.

“It’s what we’ve been waiting for,” her brother, Steve, said later.

As he began his cross-examination of Robbins, Werksman challenged her claim that she could make her conclusion based on such limited photographic evidence. And, Werksman said, her statement was especially suspect since a prior prosecution witness, a crime lab photographer who enlarged the prints, acknowledged that the nude photos were reprinted in a process that could dilute their quality.

But Robbins stood by her conclusion that the nude photos depicted a woman with different body hair than Sobek’s and showed a skin mark that Sobek did not have. She further rebutted Werksman’s contention that a lacy dress shown in modeling shots of Sobek also appeared to be worn by the woman posing nude. “I am not convinced it is the same fabric,” Robbins said near the close of her testimony, which continues today.