Prosecutors Insist Rape Suspect Is Flight Risk

Ventura County prosecutors urged an appellate court Thursday to keep bail at $10 million for a wealthy Mussel Shoals man accused of sedating and raping women at his oceanfront home.

Senior Deputy Dist. Atty. Pete Kossoris, arguing before the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Ventura, said defendant Andrew Luster, 37, will likely flee the country if bail is lowered.

“We are legitimately concerned,” Kossoris said, “that this guy is going to split.”

But the justices appeared not to be persuaded.

During a vigorous hourlong debate, they questioned whether a Ventura County Superior Court judge had violated Luster’s right to be protected from excessive bail by setting an amount so high that there was no way he could meet it.

“How is that consonant with the constitutional right to bail?” asked Associate Justice Steven Z. Perren, touching one of the key issues raised by the appellate court.

“I think what we are saying is that this is a no-bail case,” said Presiding Justice Arthur Gilbert. “It is a way of getting at no bail by setting it excessively high.”

At one point, Justice Kenneth Yegan asked Kossoris if he could recall any case in Ventura County in the last 30 years in which bail was this high. Kossoris could not.

Luster, the great-grandson of cosmetics magnate Max Factor, has been jailed for five months on charges that he drugged and sexually assaulted three women at his Ocean Avenue beach house.

Defense attorneys say the bail set by Judge Art Gutierrez is unreasonable and want the appellate court to lower it.

“He is not claiming poverty,” argued Santa Monica attorney Roger Diamond during Thursday’s hearing. “[But] he doesn’t have those kind of assets.”

The amount of Luster’s actual wealth was one of the issues debated before the court. Prosecutors suggest in their written briefs that Luster, an unemployed surfer, lives off a $31-million family trust fund. They contend he has the means--and the motive--to flee the country if released from jail.

Defense attorneys say Luster is not as rich as the prosecution makes him out to be. They say if he were a multimillionaire, he would have posted bail by now.

They further argue, in court documents and before the justices Thursday, that the defendant wants to prove his innocence and has no intent to flee.

Luster was arrested July 18 on suspicion of sexually assaulting a 21-year-old Santa Barbara woman who told authorities he took her to his house and sedated her with a date-rape drug known as GHB or gamma hydroxybutyrate.

During a search of Luster’s home, detectives found vials of an unknown liquid that they suspect is GHB. They also found homemade videos of at least five sedated or unconscious women whom they suspect may have been sexually assaulted.

After Luster’s arrest, a second victim was identified based on one of the videotapes. Then a 27-year-old former girlfriend told authorities she was also drugged and raped by the defendant.

Based on her statements, detectives rearrested Luster at the Ventura County Main Jail on July 24. He was charged with 50 criminal counts and bail was set at an unprecedented $10 million.

A month after Luster’s arrest, Gutierrez rejected a request to reduce bail, and Luster’s lawyers filed a writ to the Court of Appeal.

In October, the justices ordered the Superior Court to either lower bail or appear in court Thursday to explain why it should remain at $10 million. Prosecutors then filed their own brief opposing any bail reduction.

On Thursday, the justices questioned why bail conditions proposed by the defense, such as house arrest or having Luster wear an electronic monitoring device, could not be pursued by law enforcement.

Kossoris said the proposal is problematic. He questioned who would pay deputies to be posted at the defendant’s home, and raised concerns about whether house arrest would provide adequate security for Luster.

Kossoris also argued that the conditions proposed by the defense set a dangerous precedent for other county inmates, who could reasonably argue that they should be afforded the same opportunities.

“I don’t believe it has ever been done in this county,” Kossoris said. “I don’t think that it is a viable or appropriate alternative.”

During his argument before the court, Diamond urged the justices to rule swiftly, saying the defense wants Luster out of custody to help prepare for a Jan. 17 preliminary hearing.

Diamond asked the court to invoke an obscure provision of the state Constitution that he says allows a single justice to set bail rather than send the case back to the lower court for a new hearing.

A ruling by the appellate court is expected in two to four weeks.