Manaig case now in jury’s hands

BRAWLEY — Jury deliberations began Thursday afternoon in the case of the Imperial teen who in February 2018 allegedly threatened to shoot two Imperial High classmates.

The jury deliberations capped four days of testimony that included, among others, both of the alleged victims as well as the parents of the defendant, 19-year-old Karl Manaig.

Manaig, who faces two felony counts of making criminal threats and who remains out on bail, chose not to testify in his defense.

Each count potentially carries up to three years in prison, if jurors were to return with guilty verdicts.

Even so, a guilty verdict would not likely guarantee imprisonment for Manaig, said county Deputy District Attorney Mario Vela, following the conclusion of Thursday’s hearing.

“Most likely (Manaig) is facing probation and mental health terms as well as anger management,” Vela stated in a message.

During a Feb. 15, 2018, classroom conversation about the deadly mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School of a day prior, Manaig is alleged to have told two senior classmates that, if given the opportunity, he would shoot up two Imperial High classrooms.

When pressed by one of his classmates, Natalie Ryan, about whether he would target her as well, Manaig is alleged to have said that she too would get shot if she was unable to run fast enough.

Ryan and the second classmate taking part in the conversation, Gabriel Lemus Anchondo, are the alleged victims in the case. Lemus Anchondo testified that he took Manaig’s response to Ryan to include him as well.

Their respective testimony clearly showed that they did not interpret Manaig’s statement as a joke, that they felt sustained fear and that they believed Manaig intended to carry through with his threat, Vela reminded jurors during his closing argument Thursday.

“Words are very powerful weapons that we have,” Vela said. “If you use them to threaten to kill someone else, that’s a weapon, that’s a crime.”

In order to find Manaig guilty of making criminal threats, jurors must conclude that he intended his statement to be understood as a threat, that the alleged victims felt clear and immediate fear, and that the threat was specific and unconditional.

Manaig’s alleged praise for the Parkland, Fla., shooter during the classmates’ conversation, his tendency to watch videos in class about violent video games or individuals shooting objects such as mannequins for target practice, as well as keeping a notebook with a six-page list of firearms and their capacity to kill, also did much to contribute to the seriousness of the incident, Vela said.

“If you look at the surrounding circumstances that happened that day, you will see that this was not a joke,” he told jurors.

Conversely, county Deputy Public Defender Darren Bean told jurors that Manaig’s statement was indeed a poorly timed joke that did not even prompt the alleged victims to immediately fear for their lives or immediately report it to any adults.

“It’s not real and anyone who understands just how we talk knows this is not a threat,” Bean said.

While Ryan initially testified she did not report the alleged Feb. 15, 2018, threat until a day later, she subsequently testified that she did report the incident to school officials the very same day.

Similarly, although Lemus Anchondo testified he did not feel his life was in immediate danger on Feb. 15, 2018, he said he felt fearful enough to take added security precautions around his home afterward.

Bean also reminded jurors of an investigator’s previous testimony that conceded Manaig had stated he had no intention of shooting up specific Imperial High classrooms because his friends were in them.

The notebook’s list of guns that the prosecution ominously referred to as evidence of intent was nothing more than a school assignment about a fictional country’s weapons defense products, Bean told jurors.

Bean also characterized the prosecution’s repeated references to Manaig’s past conduct as “garbage” meant to distract jurors from the fact no evidence or testimony proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the February 2018 incident was indeed a crime.

“Who is here to help you focus on the law and get you to the right outcome?” he said. “If there’s a doubt, the answer is ‘Not guilty.’ It’s that simple.”

Some of Manaig’s past alleged conduct included “stabbing” Lemus Anchondo in the back with a pencil when both were in the second grade, and being suspended on March 9, 2016, for bringing a knife to Imperial High and later being expelled for threatening a student on March 21, 2016, previous court testimony revealed.

Following Bean’s closing argument, Vela presented his rebuttal, and promptly referred to Bean’s assertions as nothing more than a distraction from the truth.

And though the defense had contended that Manaig did not even have access to nearly two dozen firearms stored in his father’s locked gun safes, Vela reminded jurors that having immediate access to the guns was not required to find a person guilty of making criminal threats.

“The fact that (Manaig) didn’t have a plan is not relevant,” Vela said. “What he said was relevant.”

Prior to closing arguments, an expert witness testified on behalf of the defense.

Thomas Streed, a former San Diego County Sheriff’s Department homicide detective and current forensic behavioral scientist, testified about the various circumstances and factors that often increase the likelihood that an individual will provide authorities with false and unreliable statements.

In Manaig’s case, his “confrontational” interrogation with investigating officers who repeatedly called him a liar, combined with his ADHD diagnosis, may have compelled him to say things that weren’t entirely true, Streed testified.

During cross examination by Vela, Streed also conceded that common interrogation tactics, such as those employed by Imperial Police Department investigators, could just as easily prompt a subject to tell the truth.

In preparation for his testimony, Streed had reviewed the same copy of a video recording of Imperial police investigators’ lengthy Feb. 16, 2018, interrogation of Manaig that jurors were shown on Tuesday.

At one point in the video, it appeared as though one investigator reached out across the table to hold Manaig’s handcuffed hand and offer reassurances when the defendant complained about the constant bullying he was allegedly subjected to while attending Imperial High.

Shortly after, the investigators leave Manaig alone in the room, where he starts crying for a period of time.