True Crime All The Time - Juan Alvarez

Episode Date: July 17, 2023

On January 26th, 2005, Juan Manuel Alvarez parked his vehicle in the path of a Metrolink commuter train in Glendale, California, causing a crash that killed 11 people and injured 180. Alvarez argued that he planned to end his own life and didn’t intend to harm anyone else, but he was convicted of 11 counts of first-degree murder.Join Mike and Gibby as they discuss the crimes committed by Juan Alvarez. Juan had a terrible childhood that was filled with emotional and physical abuse. He tried to end his life multiple times at a young age. Later he turned to meth, possibly as a coping mechanism. But it was also said that he displayed signs of mental illness throughout his life. You can help support the show at patreon.com/truecrimeallthetimeVisit the show's website at truecrimeallthetime.com for contact, merchandise, and donation informationAn Emash Digital productionSee Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.

Hello everyone and welcome to episode 341 of the True Crime All the Time podcast. I'm Mike Ferguson. And with me as always is my partner in True Crime, Mike Gibson. How are you? I'm doing good. How about you, man? I'm doing well. Happy birthday. Thank you. Turned a year older. We won't say how many years that is. And wiser.

And you turned a year wiser or just a day wiser? You get a whole year's word just when you hit that day? I do. Okay. I like it. People are going to be expecting a lot from you. Maybe I should rephrase that. Maybe you should lower expectations.

Yes. Let's go ahead and give our Patreon shoutouts. We had Teresa Reeves. Hey, Teresa. Brian Dubach. Hey, Dubach. Grace Jarvis. Hey, thank you, Grace.

Dawson Leon. What's going on, Dawson? Barbara Bodler. Hey, Bodler. Angela T jumped out to our highest level. That's awesome, Angela. Kathleen Cracky. Hey, Cracky.

Donna Balfour. Appreciate that, Donna. Dathan Simpson. Hey, there's Dathan. Don Jans. Oh, thank you, Donbar. Alexandria Dunbar. Oh, Dunbar.

That's a strong last name. It is. It is very. Missy Amaru. Hey, Amaru. Dave Howard. What's up, Dave? And Sarah Jane Blanford.

And there's Sarah Jane. So a lot of great new Patreon support. And then if we go back into the vault, this week, we selected Denise Nut Beers. Hey, nut beers. So we appreciate that long-term support as well. And we had some great PayPal. donations from Lori Lee. Hey, Lori. And Kia Marie O'Reilly. Thank you, Kia Marie. Yeah, thanks to everyone. Gibbs, right now we have an episode out on T-Cat Unsolved where we're talking about Sierra Breeland.

And this is a very recent case, goes back to last year. It's one of these cases where, you know, she goes on a trip with her husband, baby, dog, and then her husband reports her missing. Right. as though she made it home, but the authorities don't think she ever did make it home. We're diving to all that. Yeah, there's a lot to get to. So make sure you check that out. On our little Patreon mini episode this week, we talked about Leslie Van Houghton getting paroled. Yeah.

We also talked about the death of probably the main person of interest or suspect in the Tylenol poisoning killing. And many other things we talked about. Oh, we talked about. about a lot. Good stuff. Yep. So if you're not a member of Patreon, it's a great time to sign up. There's so much stuff out there now. It's been, what, six years worth of stuff. And if you listen to every other episode, you're getting all my passwords to all my important stuff. And if you play it backwards, there's something else happens.

Yeah, I don't want to talk about that right now, but yeah. All right, buddy, are you ready to get into this episode of TrueCom all the time? I'm ready. We are talking about the guy by the name of Juan Alvarez. On January 26, 2005, Juan Manuel Alvarez parked his vehicle in the path of a Metro Link commuter train in Glendale, California, causing a crash that killed 11 people and injured 180. Alvarez argued that his plan was to end his own life and he didn't intend to harm

anyone else, but the authorities didn't see it that way. He was ultimately convicted of 11 counts of first-degree murder. So there's a lot to break down as we go through this episode, legal wranglings and all that type of stuff. Juan was 25 years old. In 2005, he was married, he had two children, but he and his wife were estranged at the time of the crash. Juan was born in East Los Angeles, but he grew up in Mexicali, Mexico. He was the second of three children. His mother, Letitia, later testified. He was a very serious quiet boy.

He never played with anyone, according to the L.A. Times. It's kind of strange. Yeah. I mean, I think it is. Most kids like to play with other kids. So I'm kind of getting this loner vibe. I mean, it happens. I understand.

It does happen. I don't think we're used to it happening that young, but I'm sure it does for some people. Yeah. I just, you know, from my own personal experience, haven't seen a lot of that. Well, and you couldn't have been a loner if you wanted to because you had 18 brothers or have 18 brothers. And so it was a very, you know, nowhere to hide situation in the Gibson household. 18 brothers. You imagine.

No, I can't. You have a lot of brothers. not quite 18. Two. Yeah. One later described how his father abused him as a child and how he first attempted in his life when he was only eight years old. Letitia testified that Juan once tried to hang himself with a clothesline after he saw

his father assaulting her. So, you know, we're going to be talking a lot about Juan's childhood here. And I mean, right off the bat. Number one, to try. to take your life at eight years old, so young. Well, I mean, being abused and then seeing what's happening to his mom, that'd be hard for any kid to take. Yeah, yeah, no doubt. In an interview with the LA Times, Juan's family said he had shown signs of mental illness since he was a child when he was nine years old. He stood in the street hoping that a bus would hit him. But his grandmother

pulled him away. Juan later complained that an evil ghost lived in his bedroom. Maybe that evil ghost was his dad, if you believe. Delegations against him. Well, you know, I think a lot of kids are scared about, you know,

things in their room, thinking something's in their closet. That's pretty normal. Right. Now, evil ghost, I want to go back more to the standing in the middle of the street, hoping that a bus will hit you nine years old. This is a year after he had already tried to hang himself.

This is a kid who was really struggling. His family said mental illness. We talked about abuse. And so he's got a lot of things that he's battling. And obviously at a very early age, he was not just contemplating, but had tried to take his life on multiple occasions. It's such a tough thing for a young kid to struggle with.

Yeah, I agree with you. I mean, tough to struggle with a lot of these things at any age, but especially when you're talking like, you know, under 10 years old, you don't have the skills. You haven't built up the coping mechanisms or you haven't learned how to deal with certain situations. So it's got to be that much more difficult. When Juan returned to the U.S.,

He lived with his older cousin, Beddo Alvarez. Beto said in a later interview that Juan was beaten by his parents and grandparents and was raped by his uncle. Yeah. You know, we were just talking about coping skills. I don't know if you, even if you had coping skills. How would you even begin to address things like that? No, because it's just one thing after another, right, that we're finding out

happened to this guy as a child. Juan met his future wife Carmelita in Los Angeles. They got married in 1999. According to People v. Alvarez, they moved into a converted garage behind her parents' home in Compton. Carmelita already had a daughter and she and Juan had a son together. Carmelita later testified that when he was not using drugs, Juan was a good father and treated her daughter like his own child.

Juan started showing signs of paranoia and jealousy. Early in the marriage, though, according to People v. Alvarez, Juan had never been convicted of a crime. But starting in 1994, he was arrested several times on suspicion of burglary and drug possession. A 1999 cocaine possession charge was later dismissed. So he was never convicted. but he was charged and suspected of doing a bunch of things. In late 2003,

Juan injured his wrist, which according to the LA Times, began for him a downward spiral. He became depressed because, you know, he couldn't work. He had surgery to get a metal pin in his wrist, but removal of the pin was delayed because of insurance issues.

So Juan ended up taking it out himself. That sounds like something you would do. McGiver it. McGiver it. I don't think that's best practice. I've heard of people taking off their own casts, you know. Okay, that's one thing. Yeah.

But to try to remove a metal pin that's been inserted, probably into what a bone? Probably. That doesn't sound good. Remember that time I stitched myself up in front of you? Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I actually enjoyed that.

Did you? Mm-hmm. I didn't hurt. that's why I enjoyed it. Okay. In 2004, Carmelita caught Juan using drugs. She said he began to hallucinate with showing signs of paranoia but refused to see a doctor. According to the L.A. Times, Carmelita alleged that Juan had been using drugs for a very long time.

And he had been to rehab twice. Well, that's a tough habit to break, man. It is. And obviously, depending on what type of drugs you're using, can be even. harder. Some are harder than others. But I want to go back to the the trauma that, you know, this guy experienced when he was a child. And I talked a little bit about coping skills. Well, we know some people use drugs to, to cope with certain things like trauma. Right. And I, I wonder if this was something that, that maybe he did. I don't know that to be true, but it could be.

Could be. I mean, he had a lot of trauma. He had a lot of stuff going on in his life. On November 24, 2004, Carmelita applied for a restraining order against Juan. She alleged that his drug use had addled his mind. According to court papers, she filed in support of the restraining order. She described him as jealous and paranoid. In her questionnaire, to get the restraining order, Carmelita said that Juan had never assaulted her or the children. But she wrote, he threatened to take our kid away.

and to hurt my family members. He is planning on selling his vehicle to buy a gun and threaten to use it. He has caused property damage to family property. He has primarily threatened my brother, saying that he would shoot and stab him. So he's making a lot of threats. Yeah, and I don't think they're to be taken lightly. You know, she does make the admission, has never assaulted her, has never assaulted the children, But these threats are troubling to say the least.

You know, if he says that he's going to hurt her family members and specifically threatens to shoot, stab her brother to the point where he's going to sell this car to get a gun. To get a gun. That's alarming. Yeah. Very. She alleged that one had begun hallucinating and believed that she was having affairs and making pornographic. I don't know what drug he's taking. Drugs. Or drugs.

Plumption of you. Yeah. Yeah. But, you know, to approach your wife with something like that saying, I think you're having an affair. I think you're making porn movies. It's going to be kind of tough to recover your relationship from. I think so.

Conversations like that. Yeah. When you say, you know, I thought I saw Rex West leave the house the other day. Yeah. Things are going to go downhill quickly. and not just from, you know, the standpoint of losing the relationship because that's happening. But then on top of that, you know, where she feels the need to take out a restraining order, it just kind of tells you how bad it really was.

Carmelita described three incidents from November 12 through the 21st where Juan had made threats. He was hostile towards her brother because he believed that he introduced her to other men. So there's definitely a big jealousy factor here. Don't know where it comes from, but it was there. The restraining order was granted on December 14th, 2004. The terms included a suspension of Juan's right to visit his stepdaughter and son. So that's a big deal. Not only are you kind of losing the connection with your wife, but you're also losing the connection with your biological son and then your wife's daughter who's kind of become like a daughter to you. Yeah, it's going to be tough to handle, you know, to take that away from someone.

Well, and it's necessary to talk about all of this. Sure. Because these are all factors that, that I'm sure are going to lead up to what we're ultimately going to be talking about. I'm sure Carmelita felt this was the best thing she could do to protect her family and herself and i'm sure it was now did she know that it was going to cause one to do something no how can anybody know that for sure carmelita later told the l.A times that she got a restraining order because she didn't want one near their children she said she was willing to

reconcile if he got help so it wasn't as though she didn't love him right sounds like she did she just recognized that he was spiraling. And he was not the person that she fell in love with. Yeah. You know, these drugs changed him. Well, and I'm taking from it that, you know, if he got help and could get back to that person that he was,

that there was a chance they could, they could work it out. After the separation, Juan moved in with family, but they called the police twice because of his behavior. The police didn't do anything, because they said he wasn't a threat to himself or others. So those family members got a little taste of what Carmelita had been going through.

Yeah, I don't have any particulars on it, but it's got to be pretty bad, right, for your family to call the police on you. Juan wasn't working much at the time of the crash. Apartment manager Sergio Lopez told the L.A. Times that Juan played drums in a group that performed ancient Mexican ceremonies. The drums. I always wanted to play the drums. Well, it's funny because you do look a little bit like Will Ferrell.

Yeah. From Stepbrothers. And I imagine you would have your own room for the drums. You wouldn't want anybody to touch the drums. You especially wouldn't want anybody to put any of their intimate parts on your drums. 100% true. A few days before the train crash. Juan's cousin Beto found a construction job for him in Pasadena.

Juan left for work early on January 26, 2005, but he came home to pick up some tools. That morning, Juan parked his SUV directly in the path of a MetroLink commuter train in Glendale, California. And we mentioned it, right? It caused this crash that killed 11 people and injured approximately 180 people. the crash occurred at the border of Los Angeles and Glendale east of the Golden State Freeway and north of Los Felice Boulevard

about half a mile south of downtown Glendale. It was determined that at around 6 a.m., Juan Alvarez drove his Jeep Grand Cherokee onto the tracks. According to some reports, he turned onto the tracks and hooked his front two wheels over the rails. the police later found marks in the tires suggesting the Jeep moved back and forth. And I think because of this, they concluded that Juan tried to get off the tracks, but his vehicle got stuck.

Couldn't move it off. Yeah. Juan jumped out of the Jeep as the train came close and he watched it as the train hit his car. At first, the Jeep was crushed from the impact. But when the train hit the engine block, the wheels lifted. And it skipped the tracks, which caused the collision. And it was said that the train was going about 79 miles per hour. That's a high impact collision for sure.

Not good. Well, not only 79 miles per hour, but think about what's behind it, the fours. I can throw a baseball 79 miles per hour. Yeah. Well, maybe. I used to be able to throw one a lot faster. But if I hit you with that 79 mile per hour baseball baseball, ball. It's going to hurt a little bit. It's going to hurt a little bit, but a baseball is not that big.

Right. You know, a train moving 79 miles per hour with that type of force, brutal. The crash occurred just after 6 a.m. Engineer Bruce Gray saw the Jeep on the tracks. He activated the brakes and shut off the throttle. Four seconds later, the train hit the Jeep and derailed to the right. The Jeep flipped over, and it actually became embedded under the train car. What happened then was that the train hit an idle freight train, then crashed onto an approaching northbound MetroLink train. So again, this is much more than just a train hitting a parked car, which would be bad enough.

This is a train jumping the tracks after hitting the car and hitting another train or two other trains. According to People v. Alvarez, the derailed wheels of the cab car caught a switch and rolled the cab car onto a siding where it crashed into a Union Pacific locomotive that had been sitting on the siding for several days. The collision knocked the Union Pacific locomotive onto its side and demolished the first 23 feet of the MetroLink cab car. Passengers were thrown violently through and even out of the cab car. the trailing end of the cab car and the leading end of the next passenger car jackknife and smashed into the side of two passenger cars on the northbound metro link train 901 the collision derailed all three passenger cars on train 901 caved in the side of one of them and caused another car to detach and fall over on its side the fire burning at the front end of the cab car grew to a height of 20 feet as it fed upon seats,

carpet, and passengers' belongings. Total nightmare. Yeah. I mean, this was a very, very serious crash. And I think it's pretty easy to see based on this, why the fatality number was so high and the injury number was so high. Passenger Arthur Reese walked away from the crash. and saw Juan Alvarez along the tracks.

Juan asked him what happened. Reese said there was a train wreck and he thought there were fatalities. Juan said, oh no, and fell to the ground. Reese asked him if he had anything to do with this, but Juan didn't respond. To be at that site that day, knowing that your actions caused all of that chaos and everything that happened after that.

Couldn't have been a good feeling. No, it'd be tough to shorter. And then you've got, you know, the people like this guy, he walked away. Yeah. You know, what are you thinking at that point that you cheated death? Oh, of course, yeah. You were so lucky to survive this thing. According to People v. Alvarez, one returned to his house, broke the kitchen window, took off the poncho he was wearing, and he got a pair of scissors.

He then went to his landlady, Ramonda Barsena, and asked to use her phone. He called his cousin Beto and Carmelita and left messages. As he left these messages, he started poking the scissors into his chest. Well, I mean, obviously, he felt the guilt. I think he wanted to relieve himself of the guilt and all the other stuff that was probably flying around in his head before this even happened. Well, and I think this is all going to. to kind of go back to what was his purpose for being on that railroad track.

Was it to, you know, end his life? Well, now he's poking himself with scissors. Is he trying to end his life now? His landlady called 911 and Juan was taken into custody. He had, obviously, self-inflicted injuries from where he had stabbed himself. And he had also tried to slit his wrist. Barzana told the LA Times that the night before the crash, she ate dinner with Wants. The next morning, he showed up to her house covered in blood, mumbling, I'm sorry. A lot of dead people. A lot of people's dead. I'm sorry.

I didn't mean it. And the way she described it was that he was crouched over on her doorstep, stabbing himself and apologizing while he was stabbing himself to the point where blood was. coming out of his mouth as he talked. Such a disturbing image for his neighbor. His landlady? Yeah. And, you know, there's so many people involved in these types of stories.

You know, here's a woman who, I don't know, was probably trying to eat her eggs, drink her coffee, he shows up, he stabbing himself, spitting blood. After being taken to the county USC medical center, one was booked into jail on suspicion of murder, Juan told paramedics, according to people versus Alvarez, I hurt those people. I jumped in front of the train. ER physician, Dr. Danny Chang later testified that Juan repeatedly said, it's all my fault. Officer Tiffany Sanchez testified that Juan asked, how are the people? When she asked what people, Juan responded to people on the train. I got to pay for this. I'm going to see a judge. I was going to kill myself. I went on the tracks with my car and stopped. I backed it up. I tried to push big rocks to

try to get it out. The car didn't back up. I saw the train and the train took the Jeep away. I jumped out of the way. It was so loud. There was a train coming the other way. A train took the Jeep. I heard men screaming. They said a lot of people were hurt. I lost it. I freaked out. I want life or death row. I deserve it. I deserve it. I deserve it. So, you know, this is different from many, many cases that we cover. More often than not, you know, someone who's taken into custody is trying to lie their way out of what they've done. Yeah, not try to admit to everything right then and tell them what his sentence should be. Yeah.

Give me life or death right now. Witnesses who saw the crash described the second. sound of scraping gravel, followed by a sustained boom that shook the ground, according to the LA Times. The 11 victims were 51-year-old Manuel Alcala, 44-year-old Julia Bennett, 62-year-old Alfonso Caballero, 62-year-old Elizabeth Hill, 39-year-old Henry Kalinsky, 42-year-old Scott McCown, 58-year-old train conductor Thomas Ormiston, 502. 53-year-old William Parent, 53-year-old Leonard Romero, 47-year-old sheriff's deputy James Tutino,

and 58-year-old Don Wiley. So obviously, a big investigation right into the crash. They determined that eight people were killed on train number 100. That's the train that originally struck the Jeep. Three people died on train 901. according to people versus Alvarez, all of the deceased died as a result of blunt force trauma, not the fire. I hate to say it, but thank goodness for that.

Yeah. You know what I'm saying? No, I hear what you're saying. If you're going to die, blunt force trauma from the impact, I would think would be a much better way to go than being consumed by a fire. Survivor Teresa Outeretti told the L.A. Times, before I knew it, there was a big, Big Bang. I looked out the window and saw a fire. John Phipps, a passenger who was seriously injured, told NBC that he used his own blood to write a message to his family. He wrote, I heart Leslie

and I heart my kids. Can you imagine? Obviously, this guy did not think he was going to live. And using his own blood wanted his family to know. They were loved. that he loved them. Fipps spent a week in the hospital after he was pinned under the wreckage. He said that he took the train because he was called into work early. He was sitting upstairs in the double-decker car and fell asleep. The next thing he remembered, he was waking up in seeing smashed parts of the train. He touched his head and his hands were covered in blood. So we mentioned the people that died. Obviously, there were a lot more people who were injured than than we talked about, Juan Alvarez was charged with 11 counts of murder,

potentially making him eligible for the death penalty. Recovery teams ended the search for bodies in the wreckage on January 27th. By the 28th, 19 injured passengers were still in the hospital. Four of them were in critical condition. Juan appeared in court that same day. Special circumstances charges of train wrecking and multiple murder were added to the murder charges and never even heard of that. Train wrecking.

Train wrecking. His lawyer argued that he was the victim of a lynch mob mentality, according to L.A. Times. Prosecutor said one intended to end his life, but changed his mind. As the train bore down on him, he tried to drive away, but his car got stuck, and he jumped out of the vehicle seconds before the crash. I mean, he even admitted, right, that he didn't. jumped out and obviously he had to have or he would have been killed as well. My thought is,

unless you drove onto the tracks and your car just stopped. Yeah. If you did it in any way intentionally, you're going to be held responsible. Juan had been sedated and on suicide watch at the county USC medical center since the accident. He agreed to postpone arraignment until he could received medical and psychological tests. On February 15th, 2005, Juan Alvarez pleaded not guilty to first-degree murder and arson. Deputy DA Pat Dixon said the arson charge was added. After scientists corroborated evidence from the scene, Eric Chase, Juan's attorney said that Juan tried to set himself on fire shortly before the crash. Chase said he expressed a great deal of remorse and sorrow for the damages caused by his actions,

one admitted to driving onto the tracks and leaving his SUV there, I guess the big question that was going to come up in this case was, what was his culpability? It's a good question. But his attorney has made some interesting comments, right? He talked about a lynch mob mentality. Maybe there was one, you know,

when somebody does something that kills a lot of people, injures a bunch of people. All right. folks are going to be angry. They want somebody to be accountable for it. Now, I don't know that they were trying to break into the jail and pull him out and deliver their own type of justice. So I'm not exactly sure what he means by that comment.

And then the other thing that kind of jumped out of me was this revelation that Juan tried to set himself on fire before the crash. How? And if so, why was he not on fire? I just found it to be a very strange statement. In an interview, Chase said that Juan suffered from an undiagnosed mental illness and told the LA Times, I'm not sure this case will end up going to trial. It's not a matter of whether he did it or not.

This case is not a who done it. And that makes a lot of sense, right? The guys admitted people saw him. There was no question that it was him. It was him. He drove his Jeep, parked it. on purpose and got out. Now, what is reasoning for all of it was, you know, that can be debated. Did he really intend to end his life? Did he just get scared? Did he feel as though he couldn't

go through with it? So he got out. But I think the attorney's right. It's not a who done it. This is more about the circumstances around it. And around this person, Juan Alvarez. And what does he have going on? On April 25th, 2000, and five. Rita K. Tutino, the widow of sheriff's deputy James Tutino, one of the victims, filed a lawsuit against MetroLink, alleging that her husband's train was unsafe because its locomotive was in the rear. Tutino was riding in a train that was being pushed rather than pulled. Okay. I didn't even know that was the thing. Yeah. I mean, especially on those metros, right? Because the metro's going to go back and forth on the same track. Yeah. Oh. Potentially, right? So,

I don't know. I don't know anything about the Metro link in California. Yeah. So are you saying that it's almost like a monorail? That's what I'm saying. That has an engine or, yeah, an engine on the front and the back so it can go forwards or backwards. That's what I'm recalling. I mean, it could have one on the front and back to either way, going to push, but I think this is a push pole one.

Okay. In this case, it was being pushed. but I'm not really sure how it would make it more unsafe to be pushed rather than pulled. Well, I mean, now the locomotives in the back instead of the front. You don't have that in the front. If the big locomotive was there, you have that heavy. Oh, like if something crashed into it. Tootino's lawyer, Jerome Ringler, was also representing about 12 other plaintiffs in the train crash.

It was said that the practice of using locomotives to push. passenger trains is common. Some experts say trains that are pulled rather than pushed or safer because, as you said, Gibbs, the locomotive being up front provides a little bit more protection in the case of a head-on collision. It was also said that push trains are more likely to derail because the cabin front can be moved off of the tracks more easily. However, other experts have said that the research is not conclusive. But both of those things would make sense to me.

You're not going to have the weight in the front that you would if the locomotive was there. So would it be easier for that lead car to jump the tracks? I would say probably, yeah. Yeah, I think so. But I don't know if that means, you know, that MetroLink

or whoever was at fault because that's the way they chose to do it. On May 3, 2005, a witness at a preliminary, recounted how Juan Alvarez doused his vehicle with liquid before he got in and drove towards the tracks. Douglas Ross, a Glendale sanitation worker, said he saw a man in a gray poncho, emerged from a vehicle near the Chevy Chase Drive rail crossing between 530 and 5.59 a.m. He said he liberally doused the vehicle with liquid before he got back in and drove towards the tracks.

he drove past a series of metal posts blocking the tracks then drove up a steep gravel incline and onto the rails of the tracks the police said that this man was Juan Alvarez and the liquid was gasoline so you know this is not a person who drove across a set of train tracks and just stopped no he was off the road driving up the train tracks and and over them. To position his vehicle. Yeah. I mean,

it wouldn't be raised like it is at a crossing where you need that kind of level surface to get across it. Yeah. He deliberately went off of that and went up like the side of the embankment where the rails were standing up. Well, not to surprise that as wills got locked. No,

not at all. But then you have this revelation that before he even drove up on the track, he doused himself with gasoline. And maybe, you know, this goes back to his attorney saying that he tried to light himself on fire. Okay, I'm going to tell you right now, if you douse yourself in gasoline,

not too hard to set yourself on fire. No. No, not at all. It's not like solving a Rubik's Cube. You literally just need a heat source and you will go up in flame. Is it Rubik's cube hard for you to solve? It is, actually.

I know you can solve them behind your back. 20 moves or less. Yes, but I cannot. Now, authority said that Juan was trying to fake and an attempted suicide, possibly in an attempt to gain sympathy from his estranged wife. Sanitation worker Edward Branch also testified that he saw a man run away from an SUV, parked on the tracks, three to four seconds before the crash. After the crash, the man raised his.

his arms into the air and fell to his knees. On May 5th, a judge ordered Juan Alvarez to stand trial. On August 26th of 2005, prosecutors announced that they would seek the death penalty against Juan. And I talked earlier, Gibbs, about this train wrecking charge. It was said that 11 members of the Los Angeles County DA's Special Circumstances Committee decided to use a train wrecking statute. as one of the allegations against him. Spokeswoman Jane Robeson said, according to the LA Times, 11 people died.

So this was a case of mass murder. And who knows how old this train wrecking statute was? It could have went back to the 1800s for all I know. It could have. Back to the old train robbery days. Yeah. But I don't disagree with what they're saying. I mean, this was a mass murder.

A judge gave Alvarez's defense until, June 16, 2006 to submit a letter detailing why prosecutors should reconsider the death penalty. In September 2005, Alvarez got two new attorneys. Eric Chase stepped down because he didn't have the resources for a death penalty case as a pro bono lawyer. And we all know, right? Death penalty cases are very, very involved. And it takes a lot of resources.

A lot of people hours. And money, you know, you're going to need experts. You're going to need a lot of different things. On June 18, 2006, a judge relieved Juan's new attorneys of their duties due to a conflict of interest. The conflict involved a jailhouse informant. The DA's office received the information in December, but couldn't give it to the defense until May due to a safety issue. So I couldn't find any more about it, but it sounds interesting. I wish I had all the details. But because of all this, right, this is like what, his third attorney he's on? Yeah.

Or set of attorneys. His trial didn't start until April 28, 2008. The central issue at trial was whether Juan set out to derail the train or whether he was intending to end his life. Juan maintained that he never intended to hurt anyone but himself. And he didn't dispute that his actions caused the tragedy. So we're going to go through some testimony, but, you know, I kind of want to break this part down because it really is the key issue. There's no doubt that his actions caused the death and injury of all those people. Sure.

He said over and over, I never meant to hurt anyone but myself. But how did he think that was not going to hurt other people? people. You didn't think that a train could potentially come along and smash, you know, smash into your Jeep even after you took your life and that people would get hurt? I guess he didn't think that far out. You know, I'm just thinking, why didn't he just walk out on the tracks or lay down if that's really what you wanted. Or if your plan was to set yourself on fire, why did it have to be on the middle of a train track? Right. Why there? Why there? So, I don't know, we got a lot to go through, though.

The following trial testimony was reported by the LA Times. Defense attorney Thomas Kilty argued that Juan's actions were a failed suicide attempt. Juan changed his mind and tried to remove his Jeep from the tracks, but it was stuck. Kilty told the court, if Juan Alvarez's intent was to commit suicide, then there is no question that he's not guilty of the felonies in a civil and moral sense. It was his fault. And there's no denying that. But there is no first degree murder because he did not intend to derail and burn the train.

And I get where this guy is going, right? You need intent. You do for the first degree murder. But if it's not that, there's got to be some other charge of murder because what he did caused, caused the death of 11 people. But I think right now he's just focused on first degree. the death penalty, all of that. Kilty said witnesses would testify about one state of mind before and after the train crash.

One witness saw Juan fall to his knees and cry when he learned people died in the crash. Kilty described Juan as a depressed psychotic with a history of suicide attempts beginning at the age of eight when he tried to hang himself. We mentioned the delusions and his attorney brought those up saying, his delusions that his wife was having an affair became so intense that he believed another man was in bed with them at night. Wow. What is mine is creating. If it's true.

If it's true. Yeah. If that is true that you really believed that your wife was not only cheating on you, but had another man in the bed at the same time you were there. Yeah. Then there really is something going on. in your mind. In your mind.

Yeah. You are experiencing some, some very serious issues. Now, Kilty told the jury that one also thought the train would be a freight train, not a passenger train. Okay, is there a difference there? Yeah, there's going to be less people. But it doesn't mean that somebody's not going to get hurt. Somebody's driving the train.

Yeah. There's going to be an impact. And that's going to result in injuries or worse. He said that afterwards, one was overwhelmed with regret and stabbed himself in another attempt to end his life. The defense argued that Juan could not have foreseen the chain reaction crash that occurred. Kilty said he's a mentally ill flying under the radar street level meth addict. He just wanted to kill himself.

So you can see the defensive strategy. They're not trying to paint this guy in the perfect light because I don't think they can do that. No. If anything, they're trying to lay what they believe all his faults are, you know, out on the table, right? He's a meth addict. And then on top of that, he's trying to detail out some of his issues with mental illness.

Yeah, I think you want to tell the story and make the jury feel bad for him, right? Well, and if not feel bad, I get where you're going with it. how responsible are you for your actions? Because your actions are not in doubt, right? You've admitted to them. Other people have corroborated it with what they saw. Right. So it's got to be something else. You're not responsible for your actions. And I think that's where the mental illness, you know, plays in and or, you know, trying to say that there was no intent. The prosecution argued that the evidence refuted the suicide claims. They alleged that one doused the interior and exterior of his Jeep with gasoline, set the

parking brake, and left the vehicle on the tracks. The intensity of the fire from the crash hampered law enforcement from assisting passengers. According to one officer's pretrial testimony, another officer testified that the handbrake were covered from the vehicle was in the engaged position, which the prosecution argued disproved Juan's claims that he was trying to move the car. So now we're back to one thing that, you know, I've talked about that struck me, right? The, the dowsing of the gasoline. If it was because he wanted to set himself on fire, that is not a hard thing to do.

No. If it was because he thought that it was going to be. to make the crash even more deadly, which is how I think the prosecution is trying to spin it. Well, then obviously that's a negative in his corner. And then you have this possible evidence of the parking break. If the parking brake was engaged when he got out of that Jeep doesn't really line up with the, it stuck. I was trying to move it. I couldn't. Then I got scared and I jumped out. Yeah. Pretty hard to move that Jeep anywhere when you got the parking break on. The parking break on.

Prosecutors argued at trial that one willfully caused the train crash in an attempt to regain the affections of his estranged wife. The prosecution accused him of a pretend suicide. Prosecutor Catherine Brom said in her opening statement, he would use these pretend suicide attempts throughout his life in order to gain attention. sympathy and pity. So she's really going after him saying not only was this one a pretend suicide. Some of the other ones were as well. Yeah. All for attention. According to the prosecution. But I'm still struggling with why does the Jeep need to be on the train tracks for any of this? whether it was a pretend suicide as the prosecution argued or if he really did go there with the

intent to end his life, why does there have to be train tracks involved at all? That part I did not. I still don't understand. Yeah, I don't get that either. And we mentioned it, right? Juan was struggling with meth addiction, had delusions, and accused his wife of having an affair by October 2004. Carmelita had kicked him out of their home and then she eventually got that restraining order.

Brom told the jury that Alvarez was successful in winning back his wife after he was jail. Carmelita withdrew the restraining order and she started to visit him. Now, I don't know what you make of that. It does seem strange a little bit to me that she would withdraw the restraining order. But wouldn't she have to do that if she was going to visit him in jail? I would think so. I don't think you could have that going. And then voluntarily go and sit right, you know, right across from him.

But does that mean that he won back her affection? I don't know that it does. Or maybe she just felt sad for him. And wanted to make sure that he was okay. Yeah. I think anybody in that situation where you loved this person. Maybe you still do love them in some sense. You always will.

You have children with them. Would you not want to check in on them? He can't get to her. No. And, I mean, he is the father of her son. And I do think she cared about him. Yeah. So she just, like you said, just checking on his well-being.

But that's not great for the prosecution's narrative. What's good for their narrative is that what he tried to do worked. because she went to go visit him and drop the restraining order. I mean, all of these things are facts. It's just what do you make of the facts, right? She did drop the restraining order. She did go visit him, but what does that mean? I think it all depends on how it's spun to you.

Right. The prosecution is going to spin it one way. The defense is probably going to come back and make arguments kind of like what we just made. It's going to be up to the jury, as it always is. Deputy DA John Monaghan, who also participated in the opening statement, said the evidence would show. One intentionally left his SUV on the train tracks, doused it with gasoline, and used MetroLink as matched to light his vehicle on fire. Carmelita started her testimony on May 5th. She testified about one's bizarre and delusional behavior and said that he had been exhibiting

it for at least five years before the train crash. He was extremely possessive and often accused her of having affairs. She said he tried to end his life three times. Carmelita said, I had to be in the middle of the bed facing him. He had to be holding my hand because he thought if I turned over, somebody else was there. He thought, I had cameras on the mirrors in my closet. He would say, why are you recording me? Troublesome, but also scary. Yeah, both, I think. Now, you know, to me, this is not a psychologist.

Right. Who is set with somebody and then is trying to tell the court what they believe this person is suffering from. This is a woman who spent many, many years with this guy day in and day out. But he always had those paranoia feelings. Well, no, I guess to my point is I always kind of think that someone could snow a mental health expert if they really, really wanted to, if it was in their best interest to. Possibly. Not everyone, but I think there are people who could.

Sure. But over the course of five, ten years, are you going to be able to put on an act for your wife? I don't think so. I think what she is saying, if true, really. gives you some insight. Yeah, well, no doubt. If anybody's going to know the real Juan, it's her. She's been around him for all this time. She said that Juan thought the TV was speaking to him and he believed she and the children were plotting against him. So again, more paranoia. She testified that Juan never seemed committed to getting help for

drug addiction or mental illness. Carmilla acknowledged that she showed him a faction and pity after he attempted to end his life. She also acknowledged that she filed for a restraining order against him in 2004 for making threats, but withdrew the request because she felt guilty. And you know, it was the prosecution that got her to admit that she showed him affection and pity after he attempted to end his life because that's part of their theory, right? That's why he did it to win her back.

because they were estranged. Juan Alvarez started his testimony on May 27th. He said, I feel terrible and I ask for forgiveness. I believe some of the family members are here today. I'm sorry for what happened. I never meant to hurt any of your loved ones. That could have been my mom or dad.

Juan testified that he was trying to burn himself and denied trying to use the train as a match as the prosecution alleged. Again, to me, that's weird. If you really wanted to set yourself on fire, again, it's not a hard thing to do if you're covered in gasoline. Yeah. He testified that he woke up in a good mood that morning, but acknowledged that he thought of suicide. As he drove to the gas station, Juan started hearing his wife with someone else in the back of his car.

They called him stupid because he couldn't see them. Okay. According to him, he's seeing people that aren't there. Right. And he's also said that he saw men in the bed between them. Yeah, the TV was speaking to him. Yeah. So there are some, there are some things here that if true are really pointing in the direction of mental illness. One testified, I started to get a little freaked out. My family was trying to put me in a middle home. I started thinking I'll never get my kids. He filled two water bottles with gasoline and drove to an alley. near the tracks where he doused his hair and car with gasoline. He sat in the car and started thinking it was a bad idea to burn myself. It was going to be very, very painful.

Okay. First thing is you're never supposed to put gasoline in one of those water bottles. No. That is a no no. Big no no. But I guess if you're about to do what Juan Alvarez is going to do, that's probably the least of your concern. And then I also think the thought that, hey, setting myself on fire is a bad idea. It's going to hurt really, really badly is true. I'll say it. I can't think of a much more worse way to go than being burned a lot. I've seen some videos. Well, there was that monk. Yeah. Remember back in the day who set himself on fire and protest. And it just, no desire. No, that that, that one there is. That, that, that one there is.

a very hard video to watch. He then said that he saw the train tracks. One said that's when it came to my mind that it would be the fastest way for someone to die. He drove onto the tracks, but then changed his mind. I just thought this is pretty crazy. The whole suicide idea. He tried to move his car, but the wheels were stuck and he couldn't move it before the train hit it. So, you know, we've really kind of gotten the whole thing here from Juan. And, And he has kind of answered the question. Why, why the tracks, right? So he goes from, I'm going to set myself on fire.

Right. He ditches that idea because it's going to be too painful. Then he drives onto the tracks because he feels as though getting hit by a train is going to be the quickest way to die. But then he also said earlier that he never meant to hurt anyone. You know, maybe he just wasn't that smart of a guy and thought that the train's so big, nobody's going to get heard if it's a freight train. Yeah, there's, there's a possibility there. I mean, I don't think we ever said he was a physics major expert. No. And understand. And I think

outside of just plain old intelligence, you know, we're still dealing with what type and, what is the severity of, you know, mental illness here. Sure. Yeah. I mean, currently at that time, At that time, he didn't have the best decision-making skills, right? It doesn't seem so. Yeah. And I'm not sure how, you know, rationally, he was really thinking. I mean, you know, if you listen to some of the things his wife said, not vary. No.

The prosecution cross-examined Juan on May 28th. They portrayed him as a manipulative liar who often carried a weapon and made threats of violence. Juan acknowledged that he sometimes carried. a knife and once damaged his brother-in-law's car and paid $1,000 to fix it, he conceded that he pulled the knife on his cousin, thought about killing his wife, and threatened to kill her alleged lover. He also carried a gun in his car for a week or two. Look, he was just a ticking time bomb. It sounds like. Yeah. Now, he really had a big issue with his brother-in-law. I don't think there's any doubt about that. He also testified that while in jail, he extorted money from an inmate and threatened

to hurt him. If he didn't comply, he also sold his depression medications in jail. Okay, I don't know that that makes you look great to the jury. You know, you're trying to sell your story and at the same time, you're admitting that even after all this happened and you're in jail, you're extorting people and you're threatening them. Now, earlier that day, Juan testified that he was physically and sexually abused as a child. He admitted that he was addicted to meth and said he had been trying to quit using drugs for a long time. He testified that he now believed most of his thoughts about his wife cheating were hallucinations, but he was still a little confused. And we've kind of skirted around the issue of mental illness. Sure. What we haven't talked about are the effects of, you know, all of these drugs.

It's going to have an impact. That could have an impact, obviously, as well. The meth and, you know, how much of these hallucinations or different things were, at least in some part, related to this heavy drug use. Well, especially when you combine it with his trauma as a child. Yes. It just compounds everything or could compound everything. Well, and I think you know that his defense team is going to want to get all of that childhood trauma out there. Absolutely. To the jury, at the very least, it could be a mitigating circumstance that they would look at. One said that he never received comfort or sympathy after his attempts to end his life. His parents and grandmother used to beat him when he tried to end his life as a child. So there, I think he's directly trying to.

to contradict the prosecution's assertion that those attempts to end his life were attention-seeking or trying to get the sympathy of someone. In this case, you know, would have been his wife. Under cross-examination by Deputy DA John Monaghan, one acknowledged that he did not tell paramedics, police, or doctors that he doused himself with gasoline. Monaghan alleged that he led to that one made up the incident after learning in pretrial hearings that murder as a result of arson could come with the death pill. And this is kind of an interesting thing that I don't know comes up all that often, but you know, pre-trial hearings, there's all types of things maybe leading up to the actual trial where bits of information come out. And how much does a defendant

try to change or craft their narrative to circumvent or, you know, get out of underneath some of the things that they've learned. One said under cross-examination, I'm not expecting to come out of here. I'm just expecting to come out with something fair. I'm not an assassin. I'm not a terrorist. I'm not a murderer. That's how you're trying to make me look like a monster.

When Monaghan asked him what crime he was going to. guilty of, Juan said he was culpable of being stupid and trespassing. Stupid is. The stupid does. You know what your buddy for us said? My buddy, you're the one that, that ran cross country with him. That's because we're fast. But being guilty of being stupid and trespassing, that's a far cry.

Yeah. From 11 people losing their lives and almost 180 being injured. a result of your actions. I don't know what the sentence is for being stupid and or trespassing, but it's not much. And it's nothing compared to what it would be if you're convicted of 11 murders. Right. I mean, yeah, he was stupid.

He's going to cost that company, the train company, that city, millions and millions of dollars. But that doesn't compare to the lives lost and the injuries that people sustain from the accident. on June 3rd clinical psychologist Lisa Firestone testified for the defense that Juan fit the profile of someone who was prone to paranoia chronically depressed and had impulsive suicidal tendencies one's self-destructive thoughts were not consistent with someone who would premeditate violence over 80 witnesses testified about Juan's troubled childhood struggles with addiction, paranoia, and his attempts to end his life.

So they had on the part of the defense, a lot of witnesses. Yeah. Over 80 just kind of talking about his childhood, his struggles with, you know, mental illness, drugs. They're really trying to hammer that part home. Yeah, I think they're doing a pretty good job when you bring in 80 witnesses. It's like you can bring in three or four. And as a jury member, you'd be like, yeah, probably a friend or.

Well, especially if it's like mom, your best friend, your sister, okay, what are they going to say? I don't even know if a defense attorney could find 80 people who would be able to speak on what I'm like. Yeah. So, I mean, that's kind of a feat in and of itself. In her closing argument, deputy DA, Catherine Brom told the jury. not to forget the 11 victims of the train crash, defense attorney Michael Belter said, did Mr. Alvarez act in conscious disregard of human life?

If the answer is no, then no matter how hard it is for you to decide this, you will have to agree that Mr. Alvarez caused a tragic, fatal accident. Keyword accident. Accident, right. That's what they're wanting the jury to come back. Yeah, no doubt his actions caused the train crash. But was it premeditated or this tragic accident?

The jury started deliberating on June 24th. After almost eight weeks of testimony, on June 26, 2008, Juan Manuel Alvarez was found guilty of 11 counts of first degree murder. He was also found guilty of arson in a special circumstance allegation of multiple murders. He was acquitted of a train. wrecking charge. The jury rejected a special circumstance allegation that the murders were committed during a train wrecking. And I still have never heard of that. This is the first case, the first time I've ever heard of an actual charge of train wrecked. Yeah. After the verdict,

Juan's family did a press interview from their home in Monterey Park. The LA Times quoted Beto Alvarez saying, if at any one point, I really felt that he did this. this with any intent to hurt anybody, I wouldn't be here trying to defend him. He was not in his right state of mind. He was suicidal. He was very dangerous to himself. I don't believe he murdered anybody. And that's the argument, right?

His actions killed people. Sure. But did he murder them? Now, the jury said yes. Yeah, they did. Carmelita said, if the jury puts him to death, then they are murderers of this person. He should be put in a mental institution.

The penalty phase started on July 7th. Family members of the victims testified in court. Deputy DA Catherine Brom told the jury that Juan Alvarez deserved the death penalty and that a lesser punishment is not justice. So Gibbs, I don't think there's any doubt from the very beginning. The prosecution wanted it all. First degree murder and the death penalty. They didn't want,

anything less. On July 10th, the defense played a message from Juan to his cousin, Beto Alvarez. Juan called Beto 15 minutes after the crash. In the message, Juan said, I didn't mean to do this. Beto, a lot of innocent people died. I don't deserve to live. Beto, please pray for me. Well, I mean, I think the defense is trying to show that, again, wasn't something he met to do. It was an accident. And he was sorry that it happened at least 15 minutes afterwards. But the other part of the match is he's saying, I deserve to die for what I did. Maybe somebody might take that as a...

Okay. Yeah, he's okay with... We'll accommodate your request. Yeah. The defense argued that this message was evidence of one's remorse. The judge allowed the recording during the penalty phase, but not at trial. And that's always interesting to me. Why or how judges make those decisions.

decisions. Because you know the defense would have wanted to play it at trial. And obviously they weren't allowed to, but were allowed to play it during the penalty phase. Juan's family testified about his childhood. His mother, Letitia, testified that she attempted to end her pregnancy because her husband didn't want more children. She and Juan were beaten after he was born. She said she also beat Juan and was never kind to him. Now, you could argue this is a woman. This is a woman. that's trying to save her son. But I'll be honest with you, I believe her.

Yeah. I think, you know, as we kind of detailed out his childhood, I think it was a horrible one. There was no doubt that his father was abusive, but I don't, I think there were other people that said his mom was as well. And now she's admitting it on July 15th, 2008, the jury chose to sentence one to life in prison without parole, rather than the death penalty.

On August 20th, Juan Alvarez was sentenced to 11 consecutive life terms. Judge William Pounders told him, if there were a sentence forever, I would certainly give it to you. He also said, per the LA Times, I don't believe for a minute.

You intended to kill yourself or harm yourself in any way. I think you were setting up a scenario so you could go back to your family. And I think that's very interesting. You know, this is a judge who sat through the whole trial and is coming out and saying that he believes that what the prosecution theorized was correct. Now, he might be saying that based on the fact that the jury thought so too, but I don't

know. I think judges are for the most part pretty honest at the end of it. Sure. Yeah. But 11 consecutive lives not going anywhere. No. But I like to quote, if I could give you forever. I would. Because is life forever? Not all the time. Yeah, even when it says, well, not without parole.

Yeah. We did one not too long ago that they changed the law. And we went from death penalty to life sentence to the person getting out on parole. Yeah. By October 2009, Metro Link had spent almost $30 million to settle most of the lawsuits after the train crash. About 150 claims and lawsuits were filed against the company. Some settlement. were worth over $3 million and one was worth $5 million. However, most of them were smaller payments. Sounds like they got off pretty easy. I think it could have been worse.

Based on what? When you think about 11 individuals dying. Yeah, I get it. But what was their culpability? Well, I think if I was their attorney, I would probably push. Why didn't you have better security at the crossing? Oh, and I'm sure they did. I'm sure they said all of those things.

But yeah, I get it. It wasn't their fault in a sense, but you have, someone has to take the fall for it financially, right? Do they? I mean, this is an argument that we could have. Yeah, we could for sure. Does somebody have to get paid every time someone loses their luck? No, but yes, right? It's like we have been, I don't say trained, but we've been conditioned over time.

that someone pays somebody has to and it's always the the big company right yeah i i get where you're going with it i just think there is a part of me that thinks outside of them doing something really negligent how could they have known that this individual was going to park on the the train trail way to know and so and i don't we don't know everything that went into the suits maybe there was some things that they were negligent of or could have done better that a jury said, well, we are going to award money because you should have done this or should have done that. I'm sure there was a lot of settlements to keep that from occurring, right? Yeah.

And a lot of that, as you and I know from having worked at a big company and you still do, sometimes you just settle. Yeah. Because it's in your best interest to settle. In 2008, an appellate court ruled that MetroLink could not be sued for negligence based on the push-pull method because federal regulations allow it. And that makes sense to me. Sure. Now, if they were doing something that was against regulations, pour it on. Exactly.

A 2006 federal railroad administration report concluded that there was little difference in safety between trains that are pushed or pulled by locomotive. So, you know, all that stuff is. is kind of interesting to me. The attorneys for the plaintiffs focused on testimony from the southbound trains engineer, Bruce Gray, who testified at trial. Gray testified that seconds before the crash, he saw what looked like a reflection coming from a vehicle about three-fourths of a mile ahead. When he saw an outline of the vehicle, he hit the emergency brakes.

However, the train's black box indicated that only the service brakes were applied. at first. A few seconds passed before the emergency breaks kicked in. The plaintiff's attorney said that if Gray had applied the brakes when he said he did, the crash could have been avoided. Earlier in 2009, attorneys for the plaintiffs argued that the engineer had 11 to 22 seconds to stop the train and did nothing. Okay. Now we're in a completely different territory. Right. You know, if that is true, then you could see how a jury would look at that and say, if it could have been avoided.

If that is true, then you got to pay up. Yeah. You have a responsibility in this. But the thing, 11 to 22 seconds, somewhere in the middle, right? 11 to 22 seconds, all that, that fate was determined or could have been changed. Possibly. Yeah. If this is true.

Yeah. Because attorneys argue a lot of stuff. You know, some of it's true, some of it's not true. On January 24th, 2012, the California 2nd District Court of Appeal affirmed Juan's conviction. Juan's attorney argued that the facts didn't support a first-degree murder and arson conviction. Some evidence, including testimony that pushing cars from behind makes them more susceptible to derailment, wasn't allowed at trial. If the jury had known this, they might have ruled differently. Hey, look, we've all played with matchbox cars back in the day.

You know, when you stack all your cars down that track and you put your fingers this way and push. You know, podcast listeners can't understand or see what you mean by this way. Yeah. But you know, those cars in front are going to eventually fly off to the left or right. Yes. You know, but if they're all attached and you pull them in this way, the other way, right, with the first car pulling them, they're not going to go off track

because they're just going to continue to follow. But that's not what happened in this case. It's the opposite. No. One set of matchbox cars jumped the track onto another set of matchbox cars. So it's a little bit different scenario

than what you're painting and finger pointing. The push, pull. Yeah. Yeah. But I, you know, I think that argument is often very difficult. You know,

if this, jury had been able to hear this, things would have been different? Well, would they have been? I don't know. Right. Don't you think the prosecution would have had somebody to refute that? Sure. Claim, which we just talked about. They did. Somebody came out and refuted it. According to LA Daily News, the court found that substantial evidence established that injury to the train was a direct, natural and highly probable consequence of causing the train to ignite the gasoline-drenched Jeep and push it down the rails. The court also rejected the defense claim that the judge erred in excluding expert testimony to show that it was probable and unforeseeable that a collision

between a train and a passenger vehicle would result in derailment, a train-on-train collision, and death to a person on a train. So the judge did. didn't let that person testify, but what if he had testified? Okay, you can say it's improbable. It's unforeseeable. What does that mean? Then, therefore, there could be no intent. I don't know. I don't know if I'm on a jury that that changes it for me. I don't think so. I don't know. If I believe that you left a gasoline-drenched Jeep, then you had the intention of hurting somebody and when when a bunch of people died, you're responsible.

Right. I mean, again, I don't want to simplify it too much, but in 2012, the California Supreme Court declined to review the case. How often do we hear that? I wonder what the percentage is that they decline. I know it's very, very high. Yeah. They are very picky, not just California.

Every state's Supreme Court and the. Supreme Court. Very picky about what cases they choose. But if they're going to decide not to pick one, this was a good one for them to decline. You think? Yeah. Because there's a, there's a lot going on. On July 14th, 2002, a judge rejected a bid for resentencing for Juan Alvarez. The judge ruled that Juan was the actual killer and is ineligible for resentencing as a result of a change in state law that affected some defendants in murder cases. I don't know the exact details of the change in the law, but it's pretty interesting that this judge literally said,

Juan was the actual killer. Yeah. That was a quote. Juan Alvarez is currently 44 years old and is incarcerated at Kern Valley State Prison, according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation Inmate Locator system. At the time of the crash, I don't think there's any doubt. Gives, you know, one was struggling with addiction and mental health issues. We talked in depth about, you know, the issues that he experienced during childhood. I don't think that you can discount them.

Now, I don't know what effect those had on, you know, his later drug addiction, his mental health issues, but I think you have to, you have to look at it all as encompassing or look at it in totality. The prosecution theorized and the jury agreed that he chose to attempt to end his life in a way that caused the deaths of 11 people. No doubt, he devastated, you know, countless family, right? 11 murder victims, 180 people injured. I'm sure some of those were pretty severe injuries. Some of those were probably minor, but even a minor injury sustained in a train derailment, that's probably not going to be something easily gotten over. No, you mean, you got to think about the psychological ramifications, yeah, of something like that.

So, you know, I just thought it was, it's a very interesting case in that, as we normally see, right? One says, one side has their theory, right? The other side has a conflicting theory and the jury decides one way or the other. I just think in this one, there was a lot that really I found hard to overlook. You know, when it comes to thinking that Juan Alvarez didn't mean to do what he did, why douse the Jeep and gasoline? Why give him? Why give him? Why give on the train tracks at all. If, as you've kind of said, your main objective was to end your life. Right.

Could have done that in a number of ways that didn't involve the train track. Now, he later tried to explain it away as he first was going to set himself on fire. But that came much later. You know, people testified. He never said anything about that to first responders and people. early on. That came much later like it tried. So it kind of makes me believe that this was kind of a staged set up scenario. Now, he may not have thought that that many people were going to get hurt or killed, but I don't know how he could have thought there was no chance that somebody would

get killed. Right. So the one thing I did think there would be more on in this. And I was the one thing. I did think there would be moron in this case where the circumstances surrounding his mental health. You know, I know it came up at trial. Some people testified, but obviously the jury didn't find it compelling enough or didn't believe it one way or the other, at least to the point where they felt as though it removed his culpability, his responsibility for his actions. Tough, tough case, man. It's a tough case.

But that's it for our episode on Juan Alvarez. got some voicemails. You want to check those out? Let's hear them. Hi, Mike and Givie. This is BadiCone from Fort Worth. I called you once before. It's been a while since I've been able to enjoy K-Cat and K-Cat Unsold without actually commuting to work. But I've taken some long road trips and been able to check up a little bit. But I just listened to Charles Starkweather. You guys mentioned like a couple of movies that talk about that story. But one of the other movies that kind of is similar and references the case a little bit is the Frighter with Michael Jay Fox. And I don't know if you've ever heard of that or I've ever seen it, but it's a really

great movie. And it's kind of funny in a weird way. It's got some humor. But you should watch it. So anyway, thanks for all you guys. Keep your own time. So I definitely heard of the frighteners, but I don't know if I've ever seen it. Yeah, I don't know if I have either. Especially with Michael J. Fox. That doesn't ring a bell. No at all. But you know, those ones I'll have to like check out. Yeah, yeah. If my, you know, kicks in. Big kicks in. You and I watch so many movies, I'm sure we'll probably watch it now.

Well, first of all, I want to say happy birthday to Giddy. I'm pretty sure it's his birthday today, 7-Eleven, with the old free slurpee and all. Anyways, I was listening to this newest true town all the time. And, yeah, no, we have Stamowmills here in Utah where I live. There's actually three of them that I know of in the surrounding areas. And a lot of people go there all the time to get. you know, rough-cut timber and you can get sawed up and you can get all kinds of stuff there for a lot cheaper.

And some of the wood that they cut off, like the slabs and stuff off the outside, they just basically give it away to people and you can take it home and you can burn it in your place or whatever you want with it. So, yeah, anyway, bombing was pretty cool. Just thought I'd let you know. Stay safe and keep your own time taken. well thanks for the birthday wishes and in that free stuff they gave away the slats or the same slats mike used to make my old wooden slotted slotted chair chair yeah but the question still remains

you act like you just went to a sawmill and you were just walking around through the saws and stuff and you know cutting your own lumber eugene lets me do that man Eugene does yeah all right we had mailbag. We actually had a lot of mailback. Kate sent us some specialty T-Cat tumblers that she made at her store, tumblers by Kate. They're amazing. Very cool. And some wristlet keychains for my wife and girls. They were very excited. Yeah. Keir Vernon sent us birthday gifts, a bunch of liquorish for you and beef jerky for me. Love it. Darlina sent me some poker chips and used some postcards from Missouri. Yeah. And Vanessa Jordan sent five pounds of of Twizzlers.

Never have too many pounds of Twizzlers. Really? Because I feel like you've gotten a lot of Twizzlers in the last few weeks. Probably like 30 pounds. Yeah. We went from like not getting mailbag for what, three episodes, three weeks in a row. To Twizzlers out the wazoo. Why does Givy look like he's gaining?

Because he's eating 25 pounds of Twizzlers. Yeah. All right, buddy. That is it for another episode of true crime all the time. So for Mike and givey. Stay safe and keep your own time ticking. Thank you.