Carvalho case closing
arguments tomorrow

By Susan Kreifels
Star-Bulletin

Nora Castro, smiling and confident, told the television reporter that Alexander "Boy" Carvalho Jr. had never hurt her or threatened her, that they were always happy together, and that she had lied about Carvalho beating her because she was "confused."

The TV interview two years ago was the last thing jurors saw and heard in the trial of Carvalho, now accused of sexually assaulting Castro and holding his former girlfriend against her will.

The defense rested its case yesterday. Attorneys will give closing arguments in Circuit Judge Michael Town's courtroom tomorrow morning.

The high-profile case is complicated. Carvalho was convicted of manslaughter for brutally beating his wife to death in 1987. He lived with Castro after getting out of prison the first time in 1996. She accused him of beating her and threatening to kill her like he did his wife, then recanted her accusations to the media and Carvalho's attorney.

Prosecutors said Castro was a classic victim of domestic abuse and was pressured by him and his family to change her story.

Carvalho, back behind bars, was acquitted. But the parole authority kept him in prison until December 1997. The couple then reunited.

Last March, Castro accused Carvalho of sexually assaulting her and holding her against her will. Carvalho has admitted hitting Castro once in self-defense when they were arguing and he thought she was going to hit him. But he denies the charges.

Jurors have been told about Carvalho's manslaughter and Castro's recanted charges to help them determine Castro's frame of mind at the time of the alleged crimes, but not to decide Carvalho's innocence or guilt. Now the jury must decide which one to believe.

Each accuses the other of controlling the relationship. Yet both willingly continued the relationship a second time.

Carvalho testified that he knew Castro would make up charges and use his criminal record against him whenever she was angry. Why did he go back to her? "I love her, I can't help but forgive her," he testified. "It's the material of life."

Castro testified that she believed Carvalho would change the second time around.

Deputy Prosecutor Lynne McGivern, in cross-examination yesterday, asked Carvalho virtually no questions about the current charges. Instead she focused on the first trial and how they continued their relationship when he went back to prison.

McGivern showed him letters he had written to Castro from prison, asking her to write and visit. Those letters were later given to his defense attorney and used in the 1996 trial.

McGivern asked Carvalho if his sister had helped Castro write the letters, suggesting that he and his family pressured Castro to recant in 1996.

"You were in total control of Nora," McGivern said.

Carvalho said he believed Castro had written the letters on her own but maybe received help with spelling.

McGivern also asked Carvalho if he told her to do the TV interview in which she recanted her charges. He said no, adding that Castro only told him about the interview the day it happened.

---

Two sides disagree
on juror questioning

By Susan Kreifels
Star-Bulletin

The 13 jurors leaned forward yesterday, listening carefully to Alexander "Boy" Carvalho Jr. answer questions about why he didn't like cellblocks, whether he was still taking anger management courses and why he didn't marry the woman who now accuses him of sexually assaulting her.

Carvalho spoke easily, seeming more comfortable facing the jury box than the attorney podium, although the questions had come from the very people who will decide his fate.

But jurors had no questions last week for Carvalho's former girlfriend Nora Castro, his accuser.

The state Supreme Court recently decided to allow juror-questioning in Circuit Court on a trial basis with other innovations.

Carvalho's attorney, deputy public defender David Hayakawa, filed a motion at the start of the trial asking Judge Michael Town to disallow jury questions. Hayakawa said in the motion that the practice "violates the defendant's right to due process and fair trial."

Attorneys disagree about the wisdom of juror questions, now allowed in 22 states. Among those interviewed, the split was clear -- prosecutors applauded, defense attorneys turned thumbs down.

Public defender Richard Pollack said the practice has been tried before in Hawaii and has been "strongly condemned" by courts around the nation. "When you're dealing with jury questioning, it's basically a minefield," Pollack said. "It has created so many different kinds of problems and resulted in so many reversals."

Juror questions do not necessarily help the prosecution. Deputy Prosecutor Rom Trader said he recently lost a first-degree robbery case in which they were allowed. "Essentially it's a benefit to the overall process," Trader said. "It makes the search for truth something a lot more user-friendly than it has been."

Jurors must submit questions in writing. Attorneys are allowed to object, but the judge makes the decision on whether the question will be allowed. The purpose of the question must be to clarify facts, not to explore juror theories or discredit a witness.

Jury questions are not new to Hawaii courtrooms. They were initiated in 1988 by District Judge James Dannenberg while an acting Circuit Court judge.

A year later, Kirk A. Lapilio appealed his burglary conviction on grounds that he was denied a fair trial because jurors asked questions.

While Lapilio lost his appeal in May 1991 because the high court decided the questions did not harm the case, justices still wrote that generally they did not favor allowing jurors to "extensively question witnesses.

Two months later, the Supreme Court changed the Hawaii Rules of Penal Procedure to disallow the questions.

The justices did not elaborate on their decision.

Questions jurors asked in Carvalho trial Jurors asked Alexander "Boy" Carvalho Jr. eight questions. Then both prosecution and defense attorneys were allowed to ask follow-up questions after the jurors heard Carvalho's answers. Do you still attend anger management classes? No. He's currently locked up until outcome of trial. Who owned the "sex toys" police found in their van-home under search warrant? Nora Castro, the woman who accused him of sexual assault. If he doubted that he was the father of Castro's son, who died in a car accident, why did he keep the boy's photo after Castro left? He wasn't "totally" sure about not being the father. "I had feelings for the kid." Carvalho and Castro planned to get married last March 14. Why didn't they? "Deep down inside I don't ever want to get married again." Marriage would only make matters worse because of Castro's alleged jealousy problem. Whose decision was it not to get married. "My decision." What did you mean when you testified that you don't really say what you want to say when attorneys ask you questions? "There are plenty of things I want to say but I don't know how to explain it. When they are asking me questions, things slip my mind. I remember too late." Why didn't he like being in a jail cellblock? "Conditions are real bad" -- dirty, claustrophobic, can't smoke or bathe, no one to talk to. Which hand did you accidentally hit Castro with? "I didn't get to explain." The two were walking into their van-home. It was a small space and he was stepping up into the van. (He testified earlier that he thought she was going to hit him.) "I look down, see her hand, and try to block with my right hand."