Cash Held as Evidence Is Missing, Snags Trial

The Ventura County Sheriff’s Department is investigating the disappearance of $1,600 from evidence in a Superior Court murder trial--a development that lawyers say could harm the prosecution in a case that already hinges partly on law enforcement credibility.

The cash was part of $2,300 in a bag seized by sheriff’s deputies after a deadly shootout in Newbury Park last year involving two robbers and a controversial Los Angeles police unit that had followed the suspects into Ventura County.

A source familiar with the case confirmed Thursday that most of the money has disappeared.

When authorities tried to photograph the cash Tuesday so it could be returned to the owner of a Newbury Park liquor store, only $700 remained in the bag, the source told The Times. All $500 in a second bag was accounted for.

Prosecutors planned to wrap up their case Thursday in the trial of Robert Wayne Cunningham, who is charged with murder in connection with the police shooting death of his partner, Daniel Soly. Instead, the case was sidetracked by the missing cash.

Superior Court Judge Steven Z. Perren set a hearing for Nov. 27, explaining to reporters outside the presence of the jury that an issue involving evidence had arisen. Perren did not elaborate. And prosecutors and defense attorneys were barred from discussing the matter.

But a source said evidence problems were first discovered Tuesday when a district attorney’s investigator examined the bags of cash and discovered money missing.

Local defense attorneys said the development could hurt the prosecution’s case.

“You’ve got egg on your face and you have to wipe it off and hope it doesn’t interfere with your ability to be credible,” said Richard Loy, a former prosecutor and veteran defense attorney. “I would think that a defense attorney wouldn’t have to say a thing and the jury would still be extremely bothered by the circumstances.”

*

Loy said the prosecution of Cunningham for the death of his friend--even though police actually shot the man--would be hard to sell to a jury even without missing evidence.

“This is kind of like the outside envelope of acceptability anyway,” Loy said.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Don Glynn, who is prosecuting Cunningham, refused comment on the matter, as did his superiors.

Sheriff’s Capt. Leslie Warren, who oversees the crime lab and evidence room, acknowledged that an investigation is underway but would not elaborate.

“Apparently there is a problem,” she said. “I don’t know what the problem is.”

Later in the day, Warren’s superiors refused to provide any details, explaining that they had been barred from comment by the district attorney’s office.

“I can’t comment, confirm or deny, or make any statement on anything regarding the Cunningham case,” Cmdr. Kenneth Kipp said.

The missing money could be a problem for prosecutors because the Cunningham jury was told about the two bags in testimony given by a sheriff’s deputy. One bag contained $500 and the other $2,300, he testified.

So if the money is not recovered, it could raise questions about the credibility of the police, defense attorneys said.

“That is amazing. I have been doing this stuff in the county for 20 years, and that is the first time I have heard of money missing or misplaced,” Loy said.

On Thursday morning, attorneys met in Perren’s courtroom to discuss a variety of issues involving evidence in the case. Jurors were not scheduled to arrive until the afternoon, when they were scheduled to go on a field trip to the crime scene.

Perren told attorneys he had intended to hold a closed hearing on the matter but changed his mind upon seeing newspaper reporters in the courtroom.

Perren met privately with Glynn and Deputy Public Defender Gary Windom for about five minutes. Then, over Glynn’s objections, Perren agreed with Windom that the evidentiary hearing should be public.

“There was to be a hearing concerning evidence in this case,” he explained. “Any effort to close it is inappropriate and causes the court to be suspect.”

*

Perren said judges should encourage confidence in the courts by doing business in public.

Prosecutors are three weeks into their case against Cunningham, a Reseda resident they say is responsible for the death of his partner because the defendant provoked the shootout with police.

Defense attorneys have argued that a special Los Angeles police unit is responsible for the death of Soly, a Los Angeles County resident, because its officers followed the would-be robbers to Ventura County and waited for them to commit a crime.

The Special Investigations Section has drawn criticism for years for allowing violent crimes to occur instead of taking action to intercept the suspects.