Judge Rules Confession by Soto Is Admissible

At 4:40 a.m. on Feb. 23, two detectives and three uniformed police officers broke down the door of Gladis Soto’s Ventura apartment. They handcuffed her, patted her down for weapons and told her to stay put.

Two hours later, a Spanish-speaking detective arrived and began to question the 38-year-old mother of five about the slaying of her husband, Pedro Alba, whose mutilated remains had been found hours earlier stuffed in plastic bags dumped at the Ventura River bottom.

During the interrogation, Soto tearfully confessed to the killing. “I didn’t want to do it!” she cried, according to a transcript of the interview. “I loved him very much.”

On Thursday, defense attorneys urged a judge to exclude the confession, saying Soto was illegally detained and her statements coerced by a detective who never advised her of her rights to remain silent and have an attorney present.

Prosecutors said the officers burst into Soto’s apartment because they had reason to believe she may have killed her children. They argued that Soto willingly confessed to Det. Ralph Martinez, whose persuasive tactics were chalked up to “good police work.”

At the end of a two-day hearing, Ventura County Superior Court Judge Herbert Curtis decided the confession was not coerced and that it would be admitted as evidence when testimony begins later this month.

Thursday’s ruling was yet another blow to Soto’s defense team, which lost several other motions earlier this week.

Soto is charged with a single count of murder in the Feb. 22 shooting death of her 35-year-old husband. She allegedly hid the body for several hours, then cut it up in a garage and attempted to burn the parts in the river bottom.

*

Prosecutors say Soto was angry and jealous over her husband’s affair with another woman. They allege the slaying was premeditated, and that Soto dismembered her husband to cover up the crime.

Meanwhile, defense attorneys maintain Soto was a battered wife who endured 15 years of physical and sexual abuse before lashing out.

She faces 50 years to life in prison if convicted of first-degree murder. Jury selection is scheduled to begin next week.

At Thursday’s hearing, Curtis explained at length his ruling on the disputed confession, citing no less than eight recent appellate court decisions on the issue of police entry and interrogation.

He told the lawyers Soto’s case boiled down to three key issues:

* Did the police break the law when they entered her apartment?

* Did the officers act properly while detaining Soto?

* And did Martinez coerce the confession?

On the first point, Sgt. Bob Anderson testified that he ordered officers to make a forced entry after learning from the victim’s brother that Soto had allegedly threatened to kill her children.

Curtis told the lawyers Anderson’s decision was “reasonable and justified” given the information police had at that time.

In fact, the judge criticized officers for not immediately entering Soto’s residence once they learned of the alleged threats against her children. The officers met at a nearby school for 45 minutes before approaching her apartment, Curtis said. They only broke in after no one responded to several knocks.

“I think the Ventura Police Department would have been extremely remiss to just sit around for three or four hours to wait for a search warrant,” he said. “This was clearly an emergency situation.”

As for detaining Soto, Curtis rejected her defense attorneys’ argument that Soto was not free to leave.

*

Attorney Jorge Alvarado argued that an arrest was implied when officers briefly handcuffed Soto and then instructed her to stay within the apartment.

Curtis disagreed, noting that the officers removed the handcuffs after determining Soto’s children were safe. He also said the police never tried to block Soto’s movements.

“The defendant was never told she was a murder suspect,” Curtis said. “She was never taken under arrest. And she never asked to leave.”

Lastly, the judge ruled that the 1 1/2-hour interview conducted by Martinez did not violate the defendant’s Miranda rights.

Soto spoke openly and never tried to terminate the interview, the judge said.

And while Martinez clearly gained Soto’s trust by appealing to her religious beliefs and her emotional pain, the judge said at no time did he force her to make an admission.