Posted on: Friday, February 15, 2002

Arakawa case deliberated

By David Waite
Advertiser Staff Writer

Arakawa: Case in jury's hands . . . The Arakawa jury can choose among several verdicts. The options and consequences: • Guilty. Manslaughter. Killing Dana Ambrose. The conviction carries probation and up to a year in jail or a maximum 20-year prison term.* • Guilty. First-degree negligent homicide. Driving drunk and killing Ambrose. Probation and up to a year in jail or a maximum 10-year sentence.* • Guilty. Second-degree negligent homicide. Consciously driving negligently and killing Ambrose. Probation and up to a year in jail or a maximum five-year sentence.* • Guilty. Third-degree negligent homicide. Should have been aware of driving negligently and killing Ambrose. Probation or up to one year in jail. • Not guilty on any of the charges. Arakawa is released from court supervision. * Under Hawai'i law, state judges do not have discretion to sentence defendants to a specific number of years in prison. Instead, they must impose the maximum sentence or probation. As a condition of probation, the judge can order the defendant to serve up to a year in jail. The Hawai'i Paroling Authority later decides how much of the maximum prison term the defendants must serve before they are released on parole.

The fate of former Honolulu police officer Clyde Arakawa, accused of causing a fatal collision, is now in the hands of a Circuit Court jury whose options include convicting him of charges ranging from manslaughter to a misdemeanor or acquitting him outright.

Manslaughter carries a maximum 20-year term, but the lesser offenses that the jury can consider include third-degree negligent homicide, a misdemeanor that carries a maximum one-year jail term.

To the very end of the trial, Michael Ostendorp, Arakawa's lawyer, blamed 19-year-old Dana Ambrose for her own death, saying Ambrose was speeding and ran a red light when her car collided with one driven by Arakawa on Oct. 7, 2000, at Pali Highway and School Street .

And in his closing remarks yesterday, Ostendorp suggested that Ambrose may have been on drugs, including ecstacy, at the time of the crash, causing members of Ambrose's family to shake their heads or rub their brows.

The incident sparked public outrage after Police Chief Lee Donohue first denied and then had to acknowledge a few days after the incident that Arakawa received special treatment from fellow officers at the crash site. Arakawa was off duty at the time, and later retired.

Ostendorp yesterday described the case against Arakawa as "a puzzle with many missing pieces" and suggested police mishandled evidence and that expert prosecution witnesses crafted their testimony "to make the shoe fit" in an all-out effort to convict Arakawa.

In the wake of public criticism, police officers who testified against Arakawa have been promoted while those who showed him compassion at the crash scene have been demoted, Ostendorp said.

He said civilian eyewitnesses who testified for the prosecution had already made up their mind that Arakawa was guilty long before the trial began, based on media coverage that began within minutes of the crash.

But in his closing statement to the jury, city Prosecutor Peter Carlisle said the evidence presented at trial over the past 2› weeks clearly showed that Arakawa was drunk and speeding when he ran a red light moments before his car broadsided Ambrose's at the driver's door, almost obliterating the area in which she was seated.

Holding up a large photo of Ambrose taken before she was killed, Carlisle described her as "young, attractive, healthy, happy and most of all sober" on the night she was killed. Carlisle said Arakawa "consciously disregarded the dangers of drinking and driving."

"He knew perfectly well how dangerous it was for him to drink and drive, but he didn't care," Carlisle said.

He said that observation was based on a 1992 court conviction for trespassing in which Arakawa was found asleep or passed out on the floor in a stranger's house in Kailua. "The sentencing judge in that case told him, 'I am very concerned to hear in this particular case about the debilitating effects alcohol has on you,'" Carlisle said.

But despite the admonishment, Carlisle said, Arakawa continued to drink, going on a "seven-hour drinking binge" before Ambrose's death.

Carlisle showed images taken by a security camera at one of the bars Arakawa visited on the night of the crash. He told jurors that if they looked closely at the stop-action photos, they would be able to see that Arakawa had six beers and a shot of whiskey, on top of the five beers he drank earlier at another bar.

Proof that Arakawa was drunk at the time of the collision comes from the fact that his blood-alcohol concentration was measured at .06 via a breath test given to him at 7 a.m. the following morning, the prosecutor said.

Based on that number, the state's expert witnesses extrapolated that Arakawa's blood alcohol level was almost double — or more than double — the legal limit of .08 at the time of the collision, according to Carlisle.

But in his closing argument, Ostendorp urged the jury to ignore virtually all of the prosecution's evidence.

A prosecution witness who claimed Arakawa showed growing signs of intoxication, based on the camera images, because he first greeted another man with a hug and later toasted others around him must not be familiar with local customs, Ostendorp said.

The 1992 conviction means little because Arakawa was never charged with drunk driving in that case and because his blood alcohol level was measured at 0.2 after he was arrested in that case, the defense lawyer said. The arresting officer in that case described Arakawa as very intoxicated and unsteady on his feet.

While he was accused of having a blood alcohol close to the same level the night of the Ambrose crash, news footage shot by a local TV station within moments of the accident showed Arakawa at the crash scene, Ostendorp said.

"What do we see? Not a man stumbling around, intoxicated ... certainly not someone who had to be leaned up against a car," Ostendorp said. Mention of the 1992 case by the prosecution was an attempt "to slander" Arakawa, he said.

On other matters, Ostendorp said police never verified that the machine used to set Arakawa's blood alcohol at .06 was working properly because "no one cares about accuracy."

"The position of the defense is that but for Dana Ambrose speeding and running a red light, she would still be alive," Ostendorp said.

In his final rebuttal statements to the jury members, Carlisle described much of Ostendorp's closing argument as "conspiracy theory" created in hopes of confusing them.

"The cruelest thing is blaming someone who's not here to defend herself," Carlisle said.

He urged the jury to find Arakawa "guilty of manslaughter, nothing else."

Reach David Waite at dwaite@honoluluadvertiser.com or 525-8030.