New Judge to Take Over Aguirre Slaying Trial

After a challenge by the defense, Superior Court Judge Vincent O’Neill Jr. has stepped down from the case of an Ojai man accused of fatally shooting a Ventura County sheriff’s deputy last summer.

Defense attorneys argued that O’Neill should disqualify himself because of his former position as a chief prosecutor and his wife’s current role as head of the Ventura County district attorney’s Victim Services Division.

But O’Neill said he stepped down to avoid a lengthy legal fight with defense attorneys that could delay the murder trial--not because the challenges were justified.

“I choose to step out of this case at this time so it can proceed as expeditiously as possible,” O’Neill wrote in a six-page response late last week.

“I now request reassignment of pretrial and trial proceedings to avoid additional delays and allow both parties to concentrate their efforts on the true issues in this case,” he said.

Michael Raymond Johnson, 49, is accused of shooting Deputy Peter Aguirre to death July 17 in Meiners Oaks. Aguirre was shot while responding to a domestic dispute call. Johnson, who had a gun, is also accused of abusing his wife and holding her against her will.

A special allegation of kidnapping makes Johnson eligible for the death penalty if convicted, but prosecutors said they have not decided whether to seek it.

Johnson appeared briefly in court Monday, wearing a white sweater over his jail blues. He stared blankly at prosecutors arguing against his attorneys’ request to postpone his preliminary hearing for two weeks.

The continuance to Nov. 18 was granted, which followed a flurry of sharply worded motions about O’Neill and his connections to the case.

This is the third time this year that the public defender’s office has sought to disqualify O’Neill from criminal cases. Two previous complaints were thrown out of court.

Ventura County Public Defender Kenneth I. Clayman said his office was not trying to prevent O’Neill from hearing criminal cases.

“Obviously, there have been many cases that have been assigned to Judge O’Neill that do not result in these motions being made,” Clayman said. “The question is looking to the facts and circumstances of each case.”

In addressing the Johnson case, O’Neill lashed out at a series of accusations made by defense attorneys about his wife and the couple’s friendship with various prosecutors.

“Unfortunately, the motion to disqualify also contains a variety of groundless accusations and claims which I cannot in good conscience leave unrebutted,” O’Neill wrote in his often barbed response.

“It seems that any district attorney employee assigned to a case that the public defender’s office does not want me to hear suddenly becomes either a ‘close personal friend’ or someone who would attempt to use [my] relationship with my wife to influence my rulings,” O’Neill said.

“I would not allow any judicial matter to be influenced by past professional relationships with district attorney personnel or my wife’s current position.”

Defense attorneys argued that hiring Deborah F. O’Neill was a “sham” because she was the wife of a judge, not a qualified candidate to administer the victims services agency. The motion also maintains that the O’Neills’ friendships with top prosecutors could present conflicts that may jeopardize Johnson’s right to a fair trial.

Specifically, the motion targeted O’Neill’s relationship with Dist. Atty. Michael D. Bradbury--O’Neill’s ex-boss.

Defense attorneys have subpoenaed Bradbury to testify in the preliminary hearing about statements he made to Johnson at an Ojai hospital after the Aguirre shooting. Deputy Public Defender Todd Howeth acknowledged that it was unusual to call the district attorney as a defense witness.

“But in my experience,” he added, “it is very unusual to have the D.A. talk to a defendant in the murder of a police officer.”

The situation creates a strange set of circumstances for O’Neill, who worked under Bradbury for eight years, and as a result must legally remove himself from presiding over the preliminary hearing to avoid “any apparent impropriety,” Howeth said.

Although Bradbury is not expected to testify during the trial, Johnson’s attorneys argue that “a defendant has a right to expect that the judge assigned to try his case is able to participate freely in all proceedings.”