Tuesday, July 3, 2007

Hulsey's manslaughter trial date set

BY COLBY FRAZIER
DAILY SOUND STAFF WRITER

After nearly a year of court hearings and several delays, a trial date for Heather Lea Hulsey, who is facing numerous felony counts of vehicular manslaughter, driving under the influence of alcohol and hit-and-run, was scheduled yesterday to begin on September 24.
Hulsey has been held in Santa Barbara County Jail since June 4, when her bail was increased from $50,000 to $250,000. The decision to raise Hulsey’s bail came after the prosecutor in the case, Senior Deputy District Attorney Arnis Tolks, told the court the defendant was arrested by UC Santa Barbara Police two weeks prior to the hearing for public intoxication.
At that hearing, Tolks told Superior Court Judge Frank Ochoa “[Hulsey’s] not someone who should be allowed in the community... She’s got a severe, severe alcohol problem. I believe that she needs to be locked up. I believe she needs no temptation with alcohol whatsoever.”
At yesterday’s hearing, Mindy Boulet, Hulsey’s public defender, requested a bail hearing -- called an OR/BR (own recognizance, bail reduction hearing) -- be held.
Ochoa denied Boulet’s request for the bail hearing, saying the request was filed incorrectly.
Senior Deputy District Attorney Hilary Dozer, who sat in for Tolks, agreed with Ochoa and called such a hearing a “stall” tactic.
“There are rules and I think those rules need to be complied with,” Dozer said. “I think frankly it’s an effort to just stall the case, not an effort to solve the case. I don’t think it’s a real effort to settle it, it’s a sham.”
Boulet called Dozer’s statement “completely inappropriate.”
“I really take offense to what Mr. Dozer is saying,” Boulet said.
Dozer said Boulet could file another motion for a bail hearing, but would have to file additional paperwork stating why the court should overturn its prior decision to raise Hulsey’s bail.
After Ochoa set the trial date, Dozer told the court that any prior offers by the prosecution for a plea on the behalf of Hulsey would now be off the table -- a technicality he said was previously discussed by Tolks and Boulet.
Boulet denied any such discussion and acted surprised by Dozer’s request to expel any former plea agreements.
But Ochoa said he recalled a conversation with Tolks and Boulet to that effect and agreed with Dozer’s statement.
“Whatever understandings that might be out there are off the table,” Dozer said.
Boulet was able to get Ochoa to schedule a restitution and settlement hearing for August 20.
Hulsey, who entered the courtroom in a dress and high heels, shackled between two other female prisoners in jump suites, will remain behind bars unless someone posts her quarter-of-a-million-dollar bail.
The charges against Hulsey stem from the death of her neighbor, Dr. Ronald Shlensky, who was struck by Hulsey’s Toyota 4Runner last July 27 while walking his dog in the 700 block of Knapp Drive in Montecito.
Shlensky died the next day in Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital from what an autopsy report called “blunt force type injuries consistent with being struck by a vehicle.”
Hulsey pled not guilty to the charges and told police she hit Shlensky when she reached down to retrieve her cellular phone from the floor of her SUV.
Neighbors found Shlensky bleeding in the street.
During Hulsey’s preliminary hearing in March, two of Hulsey’s friends said they were drinking vodka with Hulsey at the Montecito Country Club pool in the hours leading up to the incident.
Evely Laser Shlensky, Shlensky’s widow, declined to comment on the possibility of a trial.
Dozer told Ochoa the trial will likely run for three weeks.

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

i applaud judge ochoa, by standing firm on increasing her bail.he has saved lives by his action. he is protecting the public. if someone had immplented a regulation before this tradgedy one would speculate our life changing event would never have happend. the legal phase adds insult to injury for family and friends. the constant reliving of her a-moral behavior and her friends and family lying and her denial is beyond suffering.
his obvious innocence and suffering should haunt her the rest of her life..nothing can erase the pain and suffering this animal , her family and friends have caused.nothing

Anonymous said...

Seems to me the Santa Barbara Superior Court and the District Attorney's Office is taking bribes. Just 2 years ago Maureen Mcdermott Killed someone while driving in Montecito, fled the scene, went home and spoke to her attorney for two hours and then called the police the following day when her alcohol level had dropped and she got misdeamenor manslaughter and a early release by Judge Eskin. She served 5 months for killing someone, her driver license isn't even suspended nor is her real estate license for moral turpitude. In fact, the family of the vicitm was not even notified by the DA to appear at the hearing for early release. Santa Barbara has a dirty DA, dirty judges and corrupt police force. Who falsify evidence and commit perjury to suit there needs. The Attorney General's Office needs to step in and clean house.

Anonymous said...

Get your facts straight about the Mcdermott case. You think the DA's office was stoked when she only got 5 months...think again. Eskin is the one to blame and because of his lenient sentence for Mcdermott every DA now files a request for a change of Judge. Don't for one second think that the Court and the DA are in cohorts. Try making sense before you post a comment!!!

Anonymous said...

I followed the McDermott case very closely and felt she got off with a slap on the wrist...running from the scene and not taking responsibility is utterly unforgiveable...I was driving around Goleta on Saturday looking at houses for sale and could not believe my eyes when I saw a home for sale with Maureen McDermott's name on the sign...I was disgusted that the Board of Realtors would let someone sell homes within the community where she runs over people with only concerns for herself!