Another Perspective on the Trial for Abdullah Wahidi

In Article VI of The Constitution of The United States of America it says;  "In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature  and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense." 

It is important to remember that everyone is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty.  It was the job of the District Attorney’s office to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the crimes that Wahidi was charged were true.  If you have never sat in on any kind of a trial, it is hard to believe how difficult it is to prove guilt.  (Remember, Wahidi does not have to prove innocence.)  There must be ample evidence and testimony to support the charges.  A jury does not take this duty lightly when determining innocence or guilt.  There are strict laws in place with exact language to cover each type of charge.  If it is found that the facts DO NOT fall within the parameters of the law in reference to the crime, the accused is found innocent.  If it is found that the facts DO fall within the parameters of the law in reference to the crime, the accused is found guilty.  I would encourage everyone to serve on a jury or sit in on a court case if given the opportunity.  It is a much different perspective than just reading about a case in the news.  When you have ALL the facts you will see how the system does work. 

Abdullah Wahid was afforded his rights as to The Constitution of The United States.  In the beginning of these proceedings over four and a half years ago, Wahidi retained the services of one of the most high profile defense attorneys in Orange County, John Barnett, who was very successful in getting this trial delayed time after time, all the while, Wahidi was free on bail posted. 

After more than three weeks of testimony at the trial, Wahidi is not "facing charges", he has already been convicted by a jury of: 

Count 1 - Attempted Murder - Found Guilty by Jury  

Enhancement - Dangerous/Deadly Weapon - Found True

Enhancement - Inflict Great Bodily Harm - Found True

Enhancement - Attempted Premeditated Murder - Found True

Count 2 - Assault with a deadly weapon or force likely to produce great bodily injury - Found Guilty by Jury

Enhancement - Inflict Great Bodily Harm - Found True 

All of this is public knowledge www.occourts.org at the "Online Case Access" - "Criminal Case Access" - Case #09HF0720 

It is interesting that Abdullah Wahidi had only two people come forward in his defense at the trial.  A cousin who admitted under oath that he lied when questioned by detectives following the incident and a girl who was at the party but did not witness  the actual altercation.  According to testimony of witnesses for both "The People" and the defense, Wahidi was accompanied to the party by approximately 5 or 6 friends and/or family.  Where were the rest of Wahidi's witnesses come trial time?  Wahidi himself admitted both on tape when questioned by detectives and under oath that he also lied to detectives about the circumstances surrounding his involvement in the stabbing.   

Yes, both sides admitted to a disagreement, which led to what was understood by Andre Murillo to be a fist fight.  What Wahidi never said or revealed was the fact that he was bringing a knife to what was supposed to be a fist-fight.  There were no attacks on Wahidi by the crowd, as admitted by Wahidi's cousin while under oath.  In fact, Wahidi's cousin wanted to "jump in" and help Wahidi, but he was held back by someone in the crowd telling him that it was just between Wahidi and Murillo and to stay back and out of it. 

According to testimony Wahidi kept his weapon concealed but at the ready.  Wahidi admitted on tape in an interview with detectives that he was never in fear for his life.  

Something else to consider that was brought up in the Wahidi/Murillo trial is the fact that Wahidi is currently serving time in prison on a completely unrelated charge in Los Angeles County.  Wahidi’s claim of self-defense in the Los Angeles case was also used, but he was indeed found guilty. 

On the surface, it is easy to cry, "Self Defense."  But, as testimony after testimony under oath during  Wahidi’s trial for stabbing Andre Murillo showed, this was not the case. 

In January, Wahidi will find out what his sentence for these crimes will be. 

There are no winners in this case.  Both those involved and their families lives are forever changed.