Ruling May Lead to 3rd Trial in Girl’s Slaying

The first time Rodney James Alcala was convicted of murdering a 12-year-old Huntington Beach girl, the victim’s mother left court with the satisfaction that justice was done.

The second time he was convicted, the judge declared that Alcala was “as guilty as anybody who has ever come through” his courtroom.

Now, 21 years after Robin Samsoe disappeared near the Huntington Beach Pier, the players involved in the roller-coaster case are bracing for a possible third trial after an appellate court threw out Alcala’s most recent conviction. All sides agree that it would be a difficult trial, both emotionally and legally.

Robin’s family members, who have hoped for years to put the murder behind them, now contemplate reliving it all over again. Prosecutors, meanwhile, are faced with the prospect of retrying a case two decades after the crime occurred and dealing with fuzzy recollections and fading memories.

The park ranger who found the body in the foothills of the San Gabriel Mountains and was a key witness in the first trial was so traumatized by the discovery that she developed amnesia and did not even testify in the second trial. It’s unclear what role, if any, she would play in a third trial.

Robin’s mother cannot bear the thought of another trial, after living through two, as well as a book Alcala wrote from behind bars declaring his innocence.

“We didn’t even realize he had any appeals left,” Marianne Connelly said. “We thought the only thing left was setting an execution date.”

The judge in Alcala’s second trial is retired but can’t believe that the case is not.

“It’s insanity,” Donald A. McCartin said. “What do I think about it? I was thinking I could do the execution myself.”

But for the Alcala family, this is a third and perhaps final chance to reverse what they see as a major miscarriage of justice for a man they believe has spent 20 years wrongly imprisoned.

“Oh, my God, I’m ecstatic. I cannot believe this. It’s about time,” said Alcala’s sister, Kriss Klausen, 54, of Whittier, her voice quavering.

It will be months, possibly years, before either side sees the case resolved.

The state attorney general’s office vowed Tuesday to appeal the ruling and to seek an order that would keep Alcala on death row during appeals. If that fails, the office can take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Meanwhile, Orange County prosecutors plan to contact witnesses and review evidence in preparation for a possible third trial, said Assistant Dist. Atty. Lew Rosenblum.

But some legal experts said the passing of years will prove a challenge, especially if some prosecution witnesses, including the ranger, do not testify.

“The defendant is there. He’s a live human being. The jury sees that constant presence there. If the witnesses are not there, then [the jury is] just getting a sterile, cold transcript, and that’s never the same,” said Brent Romney, a professor at Western State University College of Law and a former deputy district attorney.

Live witnesses, their memories no longer fresh, also are generally less effective than they were at the original trial, Romney said.

“They can refresh their memory by reading their prior testimony. But there’s more opportunity for the opposing counsel to cross-examine concerning very minor details that have been lost over time,” the professor said.

Defense attorney John Patrick Dolan, who helped represent Alcala in the second trial, said testimony of Dana Crappa, a former U.S. Forest Service ranger, offered the only evidence linking Alcala to Robin at the site where the body was found.

Crappa testified during the first trial that she saw Robin’s body and that she believed she had seen the girl and Alcala together. The witness later said she had amnesia, and she did not testify at the second trial, but her earlier statements were read into the record.

Alcala’s defense had psychologist Ray William London of Irvine listen to hours of taped police interviews with Crappa. The doctor was prepared to testify during the second trial that her statements appeared to be induced. But Judge McCartin barred London from testifying--an issue that ultimately led to an appeal.

U.S. District Judge Stephen V. Wilson of Los Angeles ruled Friday that McCartin “precluded the defense from developing and presenting evidence material to significant issues in the case.”

The long-running legal saga began on a summer day on the shores of Huntington Beach.

On June 20, 1979, the day Robin disappeared, she and a girlfriend had been playing at the beach when a man asked to take their picture. That friend later identified Alcala, a part-time professional photographer, as the man she had seen.

Later in the day, Robin borrowed her friend’s bicycle and headed to a dance class. She was last seen near the pier.

Her remains were discovered two weeks later near the Chantry Flats area of the Angeles National Forest. Her bike was never found.

During the trial, Orange County Jail inmates who shared quarters with Alcala testified that he told them he put her bike in his car and lured her away by offering her a ride.

The first conviction was overturned because prosecutors presented evidence about Alcala’s violence against young girls, facts that may have tainted the jury.

In 1968, he attacked an 8-year-old girl. Police said she was raped and beaten with a pipe. Alcala was also convicted of an assault on a 14-year-old girl. And he was facing trial in a third assault, the rape of a 15-year-old girl in 1978, at the time Robin disappeared.

Despite that criminal record, Klausen, Alcala’s sister, said she hopes that there will not be another trial and that her brother will be set free.

“There’s just no evidence that ties him to this,” she said. “You think the system of law protects the innocent, but it doesn’t work that way.”

Robin’s mother might question whether the system has protected her family, which has been faced with one roadblock after another.

The judge retired. So did the deputy district attorney who won the death penalty case in 1986. But for Robin’s family, the appeals were always looming. And now another trial could be.

“The prosecutor was really very nice to us,” said Robin’s mother. “But when the trial was over, it was over for him. He went on with his life. We had to keep living this nightmare.”

*

Times staff writer Jerry Hicks contributed to this report.