Transcription
Well, hello everybody and welcome back to Buckle Up. It's the law with attorney Larry Forum. And folks, today, once again, I have guest Ari Jacob with me today. She is in the back waiting to be brought on the show. I'll bring her on in just a few moments.
Folks, today we are going to be covering the motion from the defense that was filed in March of 2025, just earlier this year, weeks, days before the Karen Reed trial was set to begin. Now, this motion, as you will see, outlines in great painstaking detail exactly the amount of cases, the amount of people, including Summer from the Nou incident that we talked about in the last video that the defense is actually mentioning in this motion, explaining that there are similarly situated defendants that are being treated very, very differently than Mr. Mr. Bomb. And Mr. Bomb is clearly being overcharged, selectively prosecuted, singled out simply because of what? Some pressure from the president of Pepperdine University on DA Gascon back in 2023 because it's an election year. It is disgusting. It is despicable. It is horrific. And I cannot wait to share it with you all.
So, without further ado, after you like this video, comment below, subscribe to the channel, and subscribe to Ari at Little Miss Jacob at on on X and influences on YouTube. Go check out her channel. Without further ado, I bring you Miss Ari Jacob. How are you, Ari?
I'm doing great. Thank you for having me.
Absolutely. So, let's let's dive into this motion, shall we? So, tell us, you uh got your hands on this motion. You're the one who provided it to me. I would have not had it but for your assistance. So what what have you learned about this motion and this case before we dive into it? It seems like this case has something to do with Gason, the former district attorney of Los Angeles who I think within six days decided to charge Frasier with second-degree murder, which only he has been charged with. And it took a while, I think, to get some of these uh other cases from the court to say like how many accidents have been on that road and what were they charged with, but uh this document should tell us other cases that maybe people were drunk and driving or doing other things and they were charged with a lesser charge than uh Frasier was. So, let's dive right in. Let's take a look.
Uh this motion is styled as defendant's notice, which is Frasier Bomb, defendant's notice of motion and motion for dismissal based on selective prosecution, which is kind of very similar to what we've been talking about yesterday and that is look at Caitlyn Jenner for instance or uh Summer from the Nou restaurant. Why is Summer being prosecuted? Caitlyn Jenner is not and Bomb is. I mean, it seems very disjointed. So, let's take a look.
This is dated March 17th, 2025. It states, "Please take notice that as soon as council may be heard, defendant Frasier Bomb, Mr. Bomb, henceforth, by and through his council of record, we'll move this court for an order dismissing counts 1 through four of the complaint." And if I were a betting man, these are probably the murder charges on the grounds that the filing of these charges violates Mr. Bomb's right to equal protection as the district attorney's office is engaged in selective, there it is, prosecution in filing murder charges against Mr. Bomb. This motion is going to be based on the attached supporting memorandum of points and authorities, exhibits, etc. And they're asking for a hearing. Take us away, Ari.
Introduction. Introductions. Mr. Bomb was 22 years old at the time of the incident with no prior criminal history and until this accident had a perfect driving record with not so much as a speeding ticket. On October 17th, 2023, Mr. Bomb was involved in a motor vehicle accident with no corresponding allegations of impairment. Four college students from Pepperdine University were standing on the shoulder of Pacific Coast Highway and died. Mr. Bomb was initially arrested and booked for vehicular manslaughter in violation of penal code section 192 C1 and Mr. Bomb posted bond and was released from custody. However, after Mr. Bomb's release from custody, the case was heavily reported by local and national media and became national news. The president of Pepperdine called district attorney Gascon and indicated that he was receiving a lot of pressure and wanted the case filed as murder.
Oh, wait, wait, wait, hold on. The president of Pepperdine calls the DEA, says, "Hey, man. Um, I'm receiving a lot of pressure. Can we charge this kid with murder 'cause this is I I can't take all these phone calls anymore. Can you please take care of this? I'm tired. Get this monkey off my back." Am I reading this correctly?
Yeah, that's what it sounds like.
Please continue.
DA Gaston then ordered the case to be filed as second-degree murder. Because of the extensive media coverage, law enforcement and the district attorney's office did not take months or even years to investigate the incident as typically the case in vehicular homicide cases. Instead, the Los Angeles County District's Attorney's Office filed murder charges 5 days later, and Mr. Bomb was arraigned on these charges on October 24th, 2023, one week after the incident occurred. To be clear, no facts changed between the date of Mr. Bomb's arrest and the date that he was charged with four counts of murder. On October 25th, 2023, former Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascon held a press conference in which he announced the murder charges and vowed that Mr. Bomb would face severe consequences. This press conference was emblematic of the fundamental unfairness that Mr. Bomb has experienced throughout this prosecution. I'll continue. Specifically, Mr. Bomb was unconstitutionally singled out for prosecution because of community pressure and the media attention that this case has captured.
Obviously, so because we have four young dead women. Here it is. This is right in the defense's motion, folks. You cannot make this stuff up. On May 10th, 2024, in anticipation of the instant discriminatory prosecution motion, council for Mr. Bomb sent an informal discovery request to the people, meaning the people of California, the prosecution, in which council requested one, all fatality reports for car accidents that have occurred on Pacific Coast Highway in the last 10 years that are in the area covered by the Lost Hills Sheriff's Station and for those incidents, what if any charges were filed against the driver of those incident? And number two, they asked for a list of all felony cases in the last 10 years filed as murder charges involving a car that either hit a pedestrian or another vehicle causing death to another person in which there was no evidence of drugs or alcohol in the defendant's blood at the time of the incident.
And this is very important, Ari, and this is what we discussed in yesterday's video because if you have a selective prosecution, there's that language again. We cherry-pick. We pick and choose who we're going to prosecute and when and for the under the same set of circumstances, same set of facts, no use of drugs, person A gets prosecuted, person B gets get does not get prosecuted. That is not okay.
Yeah. I mean, especially when you're talking about people that were drinking and driving.
Exactly. Does that keep I mean, you know, you know I know if I have even one glass of wine that, you know, I just don't I I just think that it's it's just it's kind of black and white, right? It should be.
Well, the defense is saying and driving or yeah, the defense is saying in this case it is not so cut and dry. It is apparently very hazy. Let's keep reading.
After the government refused to provide the requested discovery, and I wonder why that is. Now, the defense filed a notice of motion and motion for discovery, which is standard practice when you're not getting what you want informally. A lot of attorneys such as myself sometimes will reach out to the prosecutor informally. Send him an email, get make a phone call, be like, "Hey, do you mind providing XYZ to me? I'm looking to get my hands on XYZ. It is within the exclusive purview of the government. I don't have access to it naturally. Can you give it to me?" And if the prosecutor goes, "Sure," and sends it to you, there's no problems. But if a prosecutor is reluctant or fails to do their job, well then you file a formal motion. You basically ask the court, "Your honor, I want to preserve the record. I want to make sure that you receive this information so that I can get the information that I need. And if I don't get what I want, well then, judge, I'm going to need to ask you to intervene."
So on January 13th, 2025, following a hearing on the discovery motion, this court granted Mr. Bomb's discovery request. Not surprisingly, because I don't think it was unreasonable in the least, finding the defense council had successfully met the threshold entitling the defense to discovery, which courts have described as a quote significant barrier to the litigation of insubstantial claims end quote. On January 31st, the people turned over discovery and on Valentine's Day earlier this year, the people turned over additional reports for all felony cases in the last 10 years filed as murder charges involving a driving related death with no corresponding evidence of impairment. And I think this is where it's about to get tricky.
All the fatality reports for car accidents that have occurred on Pacific Coastal Highway in the last decade within the jurisdiction of the Lost Hills Sheriff's Department in California Highway Patrol, a stretch of highway that is infamous for fatal traffic collisions. Mr. Bomb is the only defendant who has been charged with murder. Additionally of note is the case filed last week of a 33-year-old Instagram influencer, I think this is Summer that we were talking about previously, who was heavily drinking at the Nou restaurant in Malibu, and then was observed driving in and out of her lane, swerving. Her vehicle then crossed into oncoming traffic and collided with a car in a head-on collision. The impact was with such force that the victim's vehicle flipped and skidded across lanes of traffic and came to arrest near the hillside. That case was filed as a gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated, not murder. What do you make of this, Ari?
Have you or someone you love been injured as a result of someone else's negligence or worse, lost a loved one because of it? I am attorney Larry Foreman and myself and my team of trial lawyers are ready to help you to get the absolute maximum compensation permissible under the law. We know the system. We understand how to win anywhere in the United States 24 hours a day. 1844774 hurt. Call us. We can help.
I mean, that's wild. And considering she's an influencer, that case had a lot of eyeballs on it, too. But it seems like they were following the rules in that case or I guess more of what is usual for that type of crime.
Yeah, I've seen it before 'cause like I I think I said it the last time, but there's a football player from Vegas that ran over somebody and their and their dog and he's like training to get out and wants to like play for the NFL again. So, I think he's been there like three or four years. He's about to get out. I think this is insanity. I I'm sorry. I'm, as I'm reading this, I was already kind of like I I got the gist last time we spoke, but I wanted to try and give the prosecution the benefit of the doubt, which is, you know, it's a lot more difficult, a lot easier said than done, a lot more difficult to do for a criminal defense attorney. But, you know, I deal with prosecutors on a daily basis, Ari, I know prosecutors. I know how shady and and bad they can be, but I also know how good they can be. And I know how much they help our clients who have made mistakes, who have committed crimes, who have done stupid crap. And, you know, I come to their rescue. I negotiate on their behalf. I get them resolutions. And sometimes we get amazing resolutions sometimes from prosecutors who I've had very difficult dealings in the past. But once they get to know me, once they get to know, understand who I am about, especially when I go to these smaller counties, you know, oh, big city lawyer showing up with his, you know, expensive suit and expensive car and whatever, and I walk in there and they're like, "Oh, here comes the new guy, you know," but once they get to know me, we usually smooth our relationship over and so on. So anyway, I try to give prosecutors the benefit of the doubt, right? But now, as I'm reading this, the president of Pepperdine calls Gascon and says, "Hey buddy, fix this. Take the pressure off of me." And he says, "No problem. Let me overcharge this kid just so that we can take the pressure off the university." That is insanity. Why isn't the president of the Pepperdine University calling Gascon and being like, "Hey, why are we not working with California Department of Transportation, Caltrans, to basically renovate this entire area which is clearly unsafe because this is happening over and over again and my students are unsafe." Like, was that part of the conversation? Or like there's I think been millions or if not more than millions of dollars, I think maybe with a B billions put into California uh Department of Transportation and they said that uh fixing uh PCH was basically their top priority. So I I don't know why you would make a phone call to basically dump everything and point the finger uh to Frasier bomb when there's a bigger picture. There's a there's a bigger issue here for the students of Pepperdine if you ask me. But I don't know what kind of relationship colleges normally have with like the DA. I don't know how that normally works or if there's been this is not normal happened.
Yeah, it sounds weird.
Yeah. I mean, does this sound like Darvo to you?
Yes, a little.
Huh. What does it stand for again?
Darvo is deny, attack, reverse, victim, and offender.
Uh, that's right. So, they deny, we don't need to fix anything. Attack. It's It was this kid. He did it. It's his fault. And reverse victim and offender. We are the victims of his heinous act of killing four girls. It sounds like that. Isn't that wild? Johnny Depp trial is making uh headlines in this case as well. Darvo will never die. Okay.
Ari, would you like to go ahead?
So, here's the argument. One, the statistical evidence overwhelmingly favors a finding of discriminatory prosecution against Mr. Bomb. Defense Council received a significant amount of discovery related to traffic fatalities both on PCH and throughout Los Angeles County in which the drivers were charged with murder, charged with vehicular manslaughter only, or not charged at all. Within the last 5 years, there were four fatal traffic collisions resulting in criminal prosecution on PCH within the jurisdiction of the Lost Hills Sheriff's Department. Of these collisions, Mr. Bomb was the only driver charged with murder. The decision to file murder charges against Mr. Bomb was made rapidly within a week of the collision. The other cases have facts more egregious than the facts of Mr. Bomb's case. However, those cases did not receive the media attention directed at the DA during an election year. Cases that resulted in no filing. In the last 5 years, there were 27 fatal traffic collisions occurring on Pacific Coast Highway where the driver was not prosecuted.
Wait, wait, wait, pause. What? Read that again.
In the last 5 years, there were 27 fatal traffic collisions occurring on Pacific Coast Highway where the driver was not prosecuted.
This is crucial, folks. This is absolutely imperative to understand for purposes of Mr. Bomb's prosecution. What Ari just read literally says there have been about five to six fatalities a year over the last 5 years in the exact same area.
Yeah, let's just call it. And maybe not the exact like exact location, but on the same highway, on the same stretch of highway, there's been a car versus pedestrian, car versus car. It doesn't specify, it doesn't matter. Death was involved and not a single one of them. Not a single one was not just pro not prosecuted for murder. It was not prosecuted period.
Well, you may want I think the next line is a little this is where they they should have put the numbers because it says while many of those collisions were single vehicle traffic collisions in which the driver of the vehicle was killed. Well, of course they couldn't be prosecuted. Obviously, you can't prosecute a dead person. Sure. But others continue. Uh others involved a driver who was determined to be at fault with evidence of criminal conduct. What the numbers? What the hell are the numbers? It doesn't even matter at that point. I I agree with you that sure we have to kind of trim it down, but at the end of the day, that that's still it's mind-boggling. Please continue.
Yeah. Yeah. And hopefully they didn't do like a thing where it's like 25, right? That would be a little embarrassing. Um, but yeah, I I know how to like read between the lines sometimes in in the media and I guess you have to do it with um court filings as well, but I don't think that they would have put that. I think that there was probably a significant amount of people. I think I already had read about three or four that didn't get prosecuted. So, it says, "Notwithstanding the fact that several of these traffic collision reports were forwarded to the DA's office for filing consideration, no case was filed against the driver in those 27 fatalities that the driver was not killed."
Oh, there you go. There you go. So, it was all 27. Okay. No, no, no. Out of 27 where the driver was not killed, there were no charges filed. It's still it's still the same against the driver and those 27 that the driver was not killed.
Got it. For example, on December 21st, 2021, Janice Strong was driving on PCH when she drove at a high rate of speed on the shoulder and rear ended a man biking on the side of the road. The biker died of his injuries. A witness provided a statement stating that the bicycle was on the shoulder and not within the lane of traffic. Law enforcement concluded that Miss Strong had caused the crash by making an unsafe turning movement in violation of vehicle code section 22107 and by failing to maintain a proper distance from the biker in violation of another section and recommended that the crash report be submitted to the DA's office for filing considerations. Despite these circumstances, notwithstanding everything we just read about Janice Strong and her veering into the biker's lane is what it smells like, which is a violation and is criminal traffic conduct. Despite these circumstances that could warrant the filing of a criminal case, the DA's office declined to file charges against Miss Strong.
How do you square those away? That's fascinating. I don't think people understand how really dangerous this road is. I heard today that basically college students that live over there, they if they want to get a new car, just park it on dead man's curve, like on one of those parking sections next to dead man's curve because somebody will crash into it. You'll get a new car. That's like the running joke. So it sounds like it's depressing, right? So it's it's it happens all the time there.
Yeah. Um, and I mean even if you can if Why did they have it so that many people killed themselves just on that road and it still didn't get fixed? You know what I'm saying? Because that's just obviously you have no intent to kill yourself. I mean, I'm assuming the people they're talking about didn't have an intent to kill themselves when they crashed. So, it just puts them a microscope on how dangerous that road is.
Another example of a case in which clear criminality caused the death of a victim on PCH, but no charges were ever filed was the case of Jane Davis. On May 14th, 2019, Miss Davis struck and killed Megan Pierce while she was walking across PCH in a marked crosswalk. An eyewitness told law enforcement that he saw the driver approaching the crosswalk and believed that the driver would slow down at the crosswalk. When the witness realized that the driver was not going to stop, he yelled for the driver to watch out and stop. However, Miss Davis did not stop and hit the victim, killing her. Miss Davis was deemed at fault for the collision. Law enforcement recommended that the collision report be submitted to the DA's office for filing consideration. However, Miss Davis was never charged. Here, Mr. Bomb and these two individuals were similarly situated. Law enforcement concluded that they were at fault for death while driving on PCH. However, these people were treated drastically different from Mr. Bomb. While Mr. Bomb was charged with four counts of murder, neither Miss Strong nor Miss Davis were ever prosecuted for any crime. Indeed, at least one of these cases was formally declined by the district attorney's office. In fact, there is no record that either of them was ever arrested. The only difference between Mr. Bomb's case and these two cases is that these cases failed to garner any media attention whatsoever during an election year. This necessarily leads to the conclusion that Mr. Bomb was charged with murder only because his case was publicized and undeniably arbitrary reason for filing murder charges against Mr. Bomb in violation of his equal protection rights.
So we have number one election year, number two, four young dead female students, number three a young male perpetrator. I mean, that is if if you ever wanted a perfect storm for a media frenzy, there you have it. That's the the soup.
Yeah. With like a nice car. They they always his car. Yeah. Which was a used car, by the way, as I understand. It wasn't even a brand new car. You know, his family is wealthy. Like they got him out of jail on a $4 million bond or whatever. And so I think but what like I think I said this also last time. It's just that you have to look at these things and say if it's happening to these people, it could happen to anybody. It could happen to anybody. This is like Karen Reed all over again, only in car accident form. Is that why they charged Karen Reed with the extra charges of murder too? You think was because of that or they charged that right away or it was a police officer? I believe they charged her right away because of all the corruption that was happening like they all made the decision. The DA uh uh Michael Morrisy decided right away to just throw the book at her, charge her with everything. She was charged with murder too also 'cause there was no you can't prove intent with with these types of cases. And actually intent would have been so much harder. I mean, he already had a difficult enough time with a murder two. Murder one. He would lose right out of the gate. But yeah, and this one is is what is this one that Bomb is charged with is that's murder two.
Two. Okay. Yeah. So, still having some intentionality, right? Component. Here's what California law says about murder in the second degree. All murder that is perpetrated by means of a destructive device or explosive, a weapon of mass destruction, knowing use of ammunition designed primarily to penetrate metal, armor, poison, lying in wait, torture, any kind of willful, deliberate, or premeditated, or that is committed in the perpetration of or attempt to perpetrate another felony like arson, uh, aring someone, carjacking, robbery, burglary, mayhem, kidnapping, train wrecking, or any act punishable under some other sections, or murder that is perpetrated by means of discharging a firearm from a motor vehicle, like a hit and run intentionally at another person outside of the vehicle with the intent to inflict death is murder in the first degree. All other kinds of murder are murder in the second degree. So there you have it. That's the definition. So as long as you kill someone and you don't have basically premeditation and you don't have the intent to kill, it wasn't willful, it was an accident, it was negligent, it was a laxidasic, it was oopsie, it was whatever and it ends in someone else dying. That is second-degree murder.
Really? According to California statute.
Mhm. So that's interesting. So then what's vehicular homicide then? Uh 'cause that's what the other Summer got, right? I guess what's the difference?
So I can tell you right now the difference between murder and vehicular homicide is going to be time in prison obviously. Uh murder in the second degree is going to be much higher. It's probably somewhere around 20 years without looking. Vehicular homicide is going to be like 5 to 10 per person.
Okay. Yeah. Interesting. Well, I mean, it makes a difference when you're talking about I think two to six years for the vehicular homicide and 15 to life and then you have to do they always do it times four and then do they do it that's all up to the judge or who is it up to?
It's going to be up to the judge. In California, if I remember correctly, it is judges who decide penalties for criminal cases for defendants. Juries decide uh guilt or innocence and then judges decide the penalty. By looking at it, I can tell you that misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, which is probably not what this is, is a maximum of one year in jail and $1,000 fine. But a felony, which is often charged when the death is caused by gross negligence, intoxication, or financial gain would be two, four, or six years in prison, fine up to 10,000 per count, formal felony probation, and a suspension of your driver's license. So if they go through with this, I believe it's 15 years to life or something like that for murder 2. You know if that's right or no?
15 years to life. Yeah. Okay. So if he gets 15 years to life, that's let's just say he gets the low end of that. 15 times four, 60. That's 60 years in prison for driving sober. That's if he gets the minimum.
Yes. If that's if he gets the minimum. Yes. So today I posted uh you know if you've ever gone 90 and a 65, congrats. You were going 25 over the limit just like Fraser Bomb if he was going 70 like the witnesses say in the car says. I mean, that's still speeding going 90 and a 65, but I've seen people do it all the time, you know, not not that it's right, but it's not like going 104, which I don't think they're going to be able to prove that he was that's a big difference.
Yeah, that's a huge difference in speed. So let's let's keep going. I think some people's takes too is that well, he lived in Malibu, so he knew it was a death trap and so speeding on that road, that's why he's culpable. Now, I don't know if the they've that's has anything to do with the uh prosecutor's case, but I I guess that's what some people online say is that he should have known better.
Basically, filed cases where murder was not charged. Within the last 5 years, three fatal traffic collisions occurred on PCH where a criminal case was filed. These cases involved defendants who engaged in much more egregious conduct than is alleged in this case. However, none of those defendants were charged with murder. One example is the case of Summer Weaten. There it is, the Nou. I told you her name was Summer, who on the 4th of July last year, almost exactly a year and a week ago now, attended a holiday party at Nou on PCH. After the party, Miss Weaten was swerving in and out of her lane while intoxicated and then crossed into the opposing traffic lane, causing a head-on collision with another vehicle. I mean, if this is not culpability, I don't know what is. Killing the driver, causing head trauma to the passenger. Law enforcement determined that Miss Weaten was under the influence of alcohol at the time of the collision, thereby being at fault. On February 10th, 2025, Miss Wheaten was charged with one count of felony gross vehicular manslaughter while intoxicated in violation of a California penal section, felony driving under the influence causing great bodily injury, and felony driving under the influence with a BAC over .008 causing bodily injury, and last but not least, two special allegations of causing great bodily injury in another violation of another section. Notably, Miss Wheaten was not charged with murder despite driving under the influence, breaking numerous vehicle code violations, and causing a person to die and another to suffer great bodily injury. Furthermore, the law enforcement and district attorney's office investigated the case for 7 months, February, right? July to February, before they charged Miss Weaten.
Another one of like why don't they just investigate just so that nobody ever has these qualms with these things like with I just don't understand investigated this one.
Yeah. And that bombs they had six days and I don't think that they investigated the other people the witnesses and stuff like that. I don't think so. Keep us going Ari.
Another example of the case is Surin Makshikan, a limo driver on December who on December 24th, 2023 dropped off a customer at their home on PCH. Oh, I wouldn't want to live there. The home on PCH. Although it's very pretty. I don't think I'd want to live there. Mr. M reversed out of the driveway and collided with a motorcyclist who died at the scene. Like Mr. Bomb, Mr. M was not intoxicated. However, on November 6th, 2024, nearly a year after the incident, Mr. Makshikan was charged in Los Angeles County Superior Court this case with only with a case uh only a misdemeanor, vehicular manslaughter without gross negligence in violation of a penal code.
Also, and that's the one year, this is what we were talking about, Ari. This is the one-year maximum $1,000 fine maximum. Maximum maximum 365 days is the maximum this cat is going to go away for. And if I were a betting man, he's probably going to get probation. There's no reason. I mean, I I understand a life has been lost, but accidents happen. Accidents happen. Things happen. It It's horrific. It's horrible. No one is trying to discount it. No one is trying to make light of the situation. But to criminally accuse someone, to criminally charge someone, you have to have some element of negligence. Wantonness, intent. I don't think Mr. M had any intent here. This this feels like a not even gross negligence. He was just backing out and it was maybe it was dark out. I don't know. We need more information, but I Ari, I don't know if you agree with me or not, but this is starting to smell like a very very selective prosecution to me with Mr. Bomb.
It's it's to me it seems like selective prosecution. And then I just I don't understand why they haven't done more to that road. I mean, I guess I need more information, but for
Well, forget forget the road. Forget forget Yes, forget the road. Just think of Bomb himself compared to all of these cases, right? If you're Bomb, you're sitting there like, I I I didn't have any intent to hurt anybody much different than than these other people. And some of the people that did this guy do something also wrong at the he was he speeding? Did it say this one was backing out? Okay. Yeah. He was just backing out. He was he dropped off he dropped off a customer. He was backing out and there was a uh motorcyclist, right?
Mhm. He was not intoxicated. And they waited a year, nearly a year to charge him. Maybe because again, there was pressure from some family. So they're like, "All right, fine." I I can tell you from personal experience, Ari, you do not know this because I've never shared this story before, ever. Okay? I actually represented an individual back in 200 I want to say 16, almost a decade ago. Okay? Here are the facts. It is nighttime. It is dark. It is raining. It is wet. It's actually very dark. It was very dark that night. My client is driving later determined his BAC was 0.099. He's over the limit. Okay. 0.08 is the limit. 0.099 is his BAC. He is under the influence of alcohol according to the number. Now, whether it's accurate or not is irrelevant. Those are the facts. He's driving in the right-hand lane going Dixie Highway, which is one very lengthy stretch of road that we have. Speed limit is about 55 in most places, 45 in some other places where it's more congested. I don't think it drops below that. But he's there's no allegation that he's speeding or going uh in any way, shape, or form breaking any other rules other than being intoxicated. Intoxicated. Let's say that he is according to the numbers. Now, what happens as he is driving, it is dark. Like I said, it is raining, it is wet. A woman who is homeless, just so happens to be a homeless woman who is wearing very, very dark clothing. No distinctive markings, no um insignia that, hey, I'm a pedestrian, I'm a I'm a cyclist, nothing. She is riding her bicycle in the right-hand lane. Okay, so with the flow of traffic, not against the flow of traffic where she's more visible, but with the flow of traffic, which is a huge mistake, but that's what she's doing. So, as she is driving, I guess he does not notice her. He does not see her. She's blending in, you know, black on black. Uh her clothing is black. The street is black. and he runs over her. In his own words when he calls me, he says, "I just felt a boom boom." Oh my gosh. And then I stopped. I was like, "What was that?" And he gets out and he sees and there's a woman under his car, like behind him. Behind his car, excuse me. Police show up, they arrest him, they charge him. I have spent about 9 months in that case before he decided to go with another lawyer for whatever reason. I was doing a fantastic job. He just It's some clients it's never going to be enough for them. And that's okay. I'm not holding anything against him. He got the result that he wanted. He ended up beating the DUI. I told him my recommendation was take the DUI. Just don't go upstairs into circuit court 'cause the prosecutor was talking to the Commonwealth attorney who's the, you know, the felony attorneys, if you will, for those of you who are not familiar with Kentucky's system. You have district court and you have circuit court. In circuit court, you have the Commonwealth and in the district court you have the county. Well, the Commonwealth attorney came back and said, "Look, we're not going to prosecute this. I don't want this. This is a terrible case. I'm not interested." But my client was so insistent. I am going to beat this DUI. You're going to And he had a very good chance of beating the DUI. I just didn't want to rock the boat. But I I think when when the public defender, he ended up not hiring another lawyer. I remembered now. I believe he went with a public defender. And the public defender just milked that case for months and months and months and months and months. And eventually the prosecutor just gave up and said, "Look, just just I'm tired of it. Nobody wants to prosecute this case. I'll just give you what you want. Go away." And they dismissed the DUI and he he beat the DUI. Even not only did there's a dead woman on his hands and nothing happened.
So that's wild. That doesn't matter that it's like because she was homeless or nobody, you know, raised a fuss about it. Is it really I mean, is that just how it works in in our justice system? Like if the more people that raised a fuss something about something or how important the person was?
Exactly. That's that's all that's all it's about. That's all it's about. This is what it started to smell like.
Furthermore, on September 17th, 2021, defendant Trevon Lenel Williams was driving on PCH when he changed lanes and tried to pass another vehicle at a high rate of speed, ran a red light, and hit a pedestrian crossing the street in the sidewalk. Mr. Williams was on his cell phone, and was speeding at the time, traveling between 60 to 68 mph in a 45 mph zone. Like Mr. Bomb, Mr. Williams was not under the influence of alcohol or drugs. However, despite that fact, Mr. Williams uh that Mr. Williams violated multiple traffic laws which resulted in the death of a pedestrian on August 30th, 2023, nearly 2 years after the incident. He was only charged in Los Angeles County Superior Court case with felony vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence in violation of of section 182. Finally, on August 5th, 2020, defendant Angel Danielle Diaz was under the influence of marijuana and speeding while driving with a passenger. Mr. Diaz lost control of his vehicle and hit a pole which caused the death of his passenger. Four months later, Mr. Diaz was charged with felony vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence in violation of section 182. Ultimately, these individuals were either similarly situated to Mr. Bomb or committed acts more egregious than Mr. Bomb is accused of. They all were drivers involved in a fatal collision after allegedly engaging in various vehicle code violations. However, these three people were treated very differently from Mr. Bomb. None of them were charged with murder and the matters were investigated for months and years prior to making a filing decision.
Okay. Okay. Stop right there. So, so as we can see, we now have a pattern. We're developing a pattern. The DA's office, and this is LA County, right? LA County is cherry-picking and picking and choosing when and how they're going to prosecute. All of these cases that the defense is citing in this particular motion have said unequivocally and without fail that at least three or four so far by my account took months of investigation and were charged with misdemeanor. And maybe one of them was a felony, but still, it was all manslaughter, manslaughter, manslaughter. Not a single murder. Whereas Bomb, seven days. Seven day. You cannot do a full-fledged investigation in seven days. I don't know. I don't care what you tell me. Unless you're Michael Proctor who has investigated the case in 7 minutes, you know, 7 days is not going to be enough to determine the culpability of someone. And the fact that he was charged overcharged very quickly is starting to smell like selective and overprosecution to me. Please continue, Ari.
Indeed, the only differentiating factor between these cases and Mr. Bomb's is that Mr. Bomb's case received international media attention.
Right. This leads to only one conclusion. The decision to charge Mr. Bomb with four counts of murder was done solely because the case was being scrutinized through the media. An entirely arbitrary reason to charge an individual with murder. Now, let's look at some cases that resulted in murder charges. Finally, there have been several cases where the DA's office has charged other individuals with murder following traffic collisions with no corresponding allegations of intoxication. Now, those cases include fact patterns that are far more egregious than the facts of Mr. Bomb's case. Furthermore, those cases were filed after a lengthy, there it is again, investigation. Additionally, those defendants had lengthy criminal histories.
Now, that's new. And Bomb's history is clean, often including driving related convictions. For example, on December 8th, 2020, Anthony Allen Houston was speeding up to 100 mph in a 35 mph zone. So, almost triple the speed limit.
Mhm. When he ran a red light and collided with another vehicle, causing decapitation to one victim with and a fractured ankle to another. My gosh. Eyewitnesses and surveillance footage corroborated Mr. Alan Houston's speed and driving behavior. Furthermore, Mr. Alan Houston had a lengthy criminal history, including several violent felony convictions, state prison commitments, several violations of supervisor's release, and convictions for hit and run driving without a valid license. Several months after the collision on February 16th, 2021, Mr. Alan Houston was charged in LA County Superior Court with one count of murder, one count of reckless driving causing specific injury, one count of vehicular manslaughter, and various special allegations relating to the defendant's criminal history. Unlike Mr. Bomb, Mr. Alan Houston had prior convictions for various vehicle code violations, which is supportive of an implied malice murder charge. Furthermore, unlike Mr. Bomb's case, law enforcement investigated Mr. Alan Houston's case for several months before the DA's office charged him with murder.
Several months. Ari.
Yeah, that's wild. You want to keep going?
Another example is the case of Ronald Boen, who on March 24th, 2019 was street racing with Terrell Tucker on the I 10 freeway at speeds in excess of 100 mph. Mr. Boen and Mr. Tucker ignored warning signs along the right shoulder, indicating that traffic would be stopped ahead due to an active construction zone. However, due to their speed, Mr. Boen and Mr. Tucker were unable to safely stop their cars. Mr. Bogan sideswiped a vehicle and Mr. Terrell collided into a raised concrete wall, eventually striking another vehicle and causing a multi-car collision. One victim died as a result of the crash and multiple people were injured. Mr. Boen had a lengthy criminal history involving violent felonies. Mr. Tucker also had a lengthy criminal record which included multiple convictions for driving on a suspended license, multiple convictions for driving without a license, multiple convictions for ex uh exhibition of speed, and one prior conviction for hit and run. August 25th, 2020, nearly 18 months after 18 months after the collision. Ari, a year and a half later.
Sorry, please continue. I'm sorry. This is getting ridiculous.
Wild. Yeah. Mr. Boen and Mr. Tucker were both charged in LA Superior Court with one count of murder in violation of section 187, one count of felony vehicular manslaughter in violation of section 182, five counts of felony engaging in a vehicle speed contest in violation of one of the codes and five felony counts of two misdemeanor counts and two misdemeanor counts of reckless driving involving injury in violation of vehicle code 231. and two counts of misdemeanor engaging in a speed contest. Here, Mr. Boen had a violent criminal history and Mr. Tucker had a lengthy record of driving related convictions which supports a murder charge under these circumstances. However, Mr. Bomb has no negative driving record. Furthermore, even in the case of Mr. Boen and Mr. Tucker, where there were several cars involved and multiple eyewitnesses, the DA's office still reviewed the case for months prior to making a filing decision.
Wow. Okay, let's look at another one. This is like maddening, though, 'cause it's like, yeah, I mean, I I guess I understand that justice is putting someone in jail because if they don't go to jail, they're going to hurt other people. There's not really any evidence that that would happen.
Well, it's not about it's not about the fear that they're going to repeat the conduct. It's it's the punishment for the actions that you have committed, right? Yeah. You are being punished for your conduct. But there's such a thing as overpunishing someone because of external pressure such as political pressure or pressure from the president of Pepperdine who gets calls from all four parents saying, "WTF? Why are you guys not doing anything?" You know, do something. Okay, we did something. Okay, we're quiet now.
Wow. Yeah. Especially because Frasier said that he felt like the other guy was like a road rage driver and they should have investigated that. Especially I believe that guy has a a past driving road rage incident in the past.
So Victor, you're talking about Victor. Yeah, Victor Colandra. They should have investigated him and anyone and they never did. Doesn't seem like they did.
Well, 'cause they charged bomb 7 days after the incident. Hello. You know.
Yeah. All right. On February 26th, 2022, Petro Garibian, my apologies if I'm mispronouncing that, was driving on a canyon road at a speed of approximately 104 mph. Due to his excessive speed, Mr. G collided head-on with victim's car at a speed of 76 mph upon impact. A passenger in the other vehicle died while other passengers sustained injuries including but not limited to a collapsed lung, fractured arms and legs, loss of consciousness, and swelling in the brain cavity. Mr. G had a prior misdemeanor infraction for speeding, and his motor vehicle record revealed that he had been involved in not one, not two, but three prior traffic accidents. This guy is a habitual accident. I I don't know what's accident causer. On July 1st, 2022, which is what about 5 months, four and a half months, approximately four months later, there it is. Mr. G was charged with murder, a felony reckless driving on highway causing an injury with special allegations that the reckless driving approximately caused a loss of consciousness, a bone fracture, and a wound requiring extensive suturing to three victims. Now, unlike Mr. Bomb, Mr. G was charged after several months once again of investigation, had a prior infraction for speeding, and had been involved in not one, not two, but three car accidents prior to the alleged incident.
Wow. It just keeps on piling on, folks. I mean, it's kind of crazy that he never had a car accident. Car accidents. I've been in car accidents. I've had car accidents. It accidents happen sometimes. You know, the airbags deploy, sometimes you get injured, things happen, accidents happen. The key is, were you in some way, shape, or form culpable? That's the key question you got to ask. And as at least in my one example, because maybe because it was a homeless woman, nobody really cared as much, the intoxication was later dismissed anyway. Sweep it under the rug and the case doesn't exist anymore. You know, it is kind of crazy. I mean, I've never gotten in a terrible accident like that, but um one time I
I was driving and a a work truck, uh that was like a city work truck that works for the city was crossing basically the freeway and went across uh like all of a sudden I'm just driving down the freeway and getting off the exit and I see like a car like in a T position right in front of me. I'm about to hit it and I'm like, why is he I remember thinking, why is he turning left like that on the freeway? Cuz he was trying to go to the side of the road. Anyway, luckily enough, nobody was hurt and I was okay.
But when we went when he called the the police to come and do the thing or whatever, the police officer was like, "Hey, there was he had a camera and you know, he thinks you were driving close or maybe switch lanes or whatever." Anyway, the point is I could never get that uh camera footage. I I got the thing dismissed because the police officer said I was driving too close. But he's like, "I watched, you know, a little tiny uh like GoPro, you know, screen, so it's about an inch wide, so I couldn't see that well." Never got the thing. And, you know, I think they they uh the insurance said it was my fault still, but I could never get uh the video. And I swore it was because it was like a city truck and maybe ah there it is. It was a city truck. I was waiting for the the justification as to why you never got the evidence.
On December 25th, 2020, Henry Herado and Tony Tatum participated in illegal speed racing. During the race, Mr. Tatum lost control of his vehicle and collided onto into Mr. Herado's vehicle, which caused both vehicles to travel onto an embankment where spectators had gathered. Mr. Tatum's car crashed into a tree while Mr. Herado's car struck several spectators, killing one and critically injuring five others. Mr. Herado had five prior convictions, including exhibition of speed and driving on a suspended license engaging in a street race. Wow. Mr. Mr. Tatum had several prior prison terms for violent felony convictions.
On February 8th, 2021, more than a month later, Mr. Herado and Mr. Tatum were both charged in LA County Superior Court with murder. Uh, and here, unlike Mr. bomb. Both defendants had criminal records supporting implied malice necessary to file a dry Watson case. In fact, Mr. Herertado had a documented history of engaging in street races. Furthermore, there were many spectators who gave eyewitness statements to law enforcement regarding the accident. However, despite the overwhelming evidence, law enforcement investigated this case for at least a month before charging the defendants. This differs drastically from the case of Mr. bomb who was charged with murder a mere week after the alleged incident.
In California, a dry Watson law doesn't exist is what it says. The term Watson refers to a legal concept relates relating to DUI and murder, specifically Watson murder. This arises when a driver previously warned about the dangers of DUI through a Watson admonition causes a fatal accident. The dry part basically refers to the fact that a DY defendant may not have been visibly intoxicated at the time of the offense, but still faces the possibility of murder charges due to the prior warning. So, this man was warned based on his prior conduct that, hey, speeding can cause very serious injuries and or death. Stop it. Stop doing it. And they're like, okay. And then they go out and do it anyway. So a dry Watson, a wet Watson or just a Watson would be they were also DUI in that particular case. They weren't, but they were already on the hook because they were warned by a judge, by the court, by the prosecutor, hey, don't do it again. So there we go. We both learned something new. Okay, interesting.
Finally, on March 2nd, 2018, Richard Le was speeding when he swerved into the bike lane, struck two-part cars, and struck and killed a pedestrian. Mr. Le then fled the scene. Oof, that's a bad one. Mr. Le was on summary probation for driving under the influence and had a suspended license at the time of the accident, which is very possible that he was also under the influence at the time of the accident. Maybe that's why they fled. Who knows? 3 years. Wait, am I reading this correctly? On February 26th, that's almost 3 years later. On February 26, 2021, 3 years after the incident, Mr. Leil was charged in LA County Superior Court with murder, felony vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence, and misdemeanor hit and run resulting in property damage. Unlike Mr. Bomb, Mr. Le was on summary probation at the time of the offense and had been given the Watson advisement at the time of his sentencing twice prior for his prior DUIs. Furthermore, Mr. Leil had a documented history of continuing to drive while his license was suspended. Even in light of the overwhelming evidence, the DA's office did not file charges for almost three years. Wow. Take it away, Ari. Finish us off.
Ultimately, the statistics cannot be disputed. There are countless cases within Los Angeles County in which the district attorney's office has treated individuals who are similarly situated to Mr. Bomb differently by filing vehicular manslaughter charges under nearly identical circumstances. Furthermore, there are individuals who were charged with murder in cases where implied malice can be easily imputed given the defendant's criminal history. Finally, in the vast majority of the cases where murder was charged, law enforcement spent months investigating and analyzing the evidence prior to the case being filed. The fact that Mr. Bomb was the only person charged with murder out of all the fatally out of all the fatality reports on PCH that Mr. Bomb was charged with murder less than a week after the incident. That Mr. Bomb was charged with murder absent any prior criminal history or negative driving history. And that Mr. Bomb was charged in the discriminatory and that Mr. Bomb was charged in a discriminatory manner. This is an entirely arbitrary and wholly unjustified reason to charge this defendant with murder. Further, I agree. By the way, this is an entirely arbitrary and completely unjustified reason to charge Mr. Bomb with murder. Please continue. I'm sorry to interrupt, but that that that hits so hard for me right now after everything that I'm learning about this case. Furthermore, the hasty filing decision supports the defense's position that Mr. Bomb is being treated differently. Ultimately, because the prosecution of Mr. bomb is based on an unjustified and arbitrary purpose without which there would have been no murder charges filed. Mr. Bomb has been discriminated against by the district attorney's office in order to remedy this violation of Mr. Bomb's right equal protection under the law. Counts 1 through 4 must therefore be dismissed and the remaining counts should proceed. So they're saying go ahead with the other ones. Interesting. So, just so everybody is clear, they're asking for the four counts of murder to be dismissed and the four counts of vehicular manslaughter to move forward. So, the defense is not saying dismiss this case entirely. They're saying, "Okay, you can go ahead with the prosecution, but murder was a political move. Get rid of it and let's go with the facts." That's that's how I read it. I don't know about you, Ari.
Yeah. I mean, I think that I think that's fair, honestly. Yeah, I think that's fair. You know, I just remembered and maybe he would come on with us. A friend of mine, not in California, but in Iowa. He was a famous Bachelor on the Bachelor. His name is Chris Souls. Met him. Really nice guy. Um he was sentenced to two years suspended prison term in fatal car crash. Does that mean where they don't go to jail? They don't. Yeah, it's suspended unless they commit a new offense. Yeah. So anyway, and he had to deal with something like this. So, you know, just knowing the fact that I know somebody that this happened to, it does seem like this kind of thing could happen to anybody. And well, if they want to come on the show, I'd be more than happy to to have Yeah, I'm going to talk to them actually because Sure. Is it typical that uh they have to kind of follow these patterns? Like if they don't normally charge, have you seen it before? I guess in DUI cases and things like that. Seen what? Sorry. Like like they follow a pattern like you say, "Oh, you're probably gonna get this or Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah. I I'm at the point in my career when I can almost borderline predict. When I say borderline, I mean no, I can actually predict. Tell me what the charges are. Tell me who the perpetrator is. Tell me who the victim is. Tell me what the injuries are. Uh tell me which county you're in, and I'll tell you what you're probably going to get, what your punishment and sentence is going to be in any county in Kentucky. What do you think if this was happened in that case and it wasn't like it hadn't gone viral or whatever? There was no Gascon gone. I I think he would have been charged with four counts of manslaughter. Yeah, I'm convinced. I'm more and more convinced and and even more now that we've read the motion. Ari, I wanted to thank you for coming on. This has been incredible. We're going to keep doing this because we have transcripts coming up next, don't we? Yeah. Tell us about those. Well, that's where we're going to be able to see in the pre-trial what they talked about. So, the witnesses came forward, the people that were at the scene and what Frasier said to the police and to the paramedics and all that kind of stuff. And that's going to come from them, not from Frraasier. He does not take the witness stand, I imagine. Right. Right. Yeah. No. So, we're going to take a look at that. Folks, I wanted to thank you all for coming. I wanted to thank you all for joining us. I wanted to thank Ari once again for coming on the show. Thank you for having me. And then you can find me everywhere. I'm Little Miss Jacob and I'm at influences on YouTube. So, subscribe there because I don't have that many subscribers on YouTube. So, thanks for showing me some love on your channel, Larry. I appreciate this. Is really fun. Absolutely. Go subscribe to Ari influences on YouTube. And what's your Twitter handle? Your ex handle? Little Miss Jacob. Little Miss Jacob on X. Go follow her. She has some great content. Especially if you want more information about this case and PCH and its impact on people's lives and its impact on Mr. Bomb's case, go check out she has a wonderful, wonderful thread. I think it's approaching like a million views or something like that. It's fascinating. Go check it out. Thanks so much.