Arakawa case fails to provide storybook ending for defense
By David Waite
Advertiser Staff Writer
Before Clyde Arakawa's manslaughter trial began, his lawyer, Michael Ostendorp, had visions that it would be like "To Kill a Mockingbird."
Advertiser library photo • Sept. 28, 2001
In the novel and film, a determined lawyer does his best to defend an innocent man accused of a crime that has outraged a community.
Lawyer Michael Ostendorp, left, and client Clyde Arakawa would later find the jury didn't believe Arakawa.
But there would be no Hollywood ending for the former Honolulu police officer: On Tuesday, a jury of nine women and three men found Arakawa guilty of manslaughter for drinking and driving, speeding up Pali Highway on Oct. 7, 2000, and colliding with a car driven by 19-year-old Dana Ambrose.
Ambrose, who was trying to cross School Street, died of injuries suffered in the crash.
In the movie, the crusading attorney played by Gregory Peck walks out of the courtroom with his head held high.
In real life, a red-faced Ostendorp stomped out of the courtroom after the verdict, declaring the outcome "a sad day for justice in Hawai'i."
City Prosecutor Peter Carlisle, who prosecuted the case himself, explained the lack of storybook ending. "The difference is that in 'To Kill a Mockingbird,' the defendant actually did not do what he was accused of," Carlisle said. "That's about 180 degrees away from what happened in the Arakawa case."
Carlisle said he had been surprised by the depth and breadth of the public's reaction to the guilty verdict.
"There seems to be an enormous sense of relief out there in the community that this guy was convicted," Carlisle said. "Strangers standing on street corners come up and shake my hand, and people hang out their car windows and say, 'Go get this guy.' "
The reaction to the case even surpasses what he experienced when Byran Uyesugi was convicted of first-degree murder for killing seven of his co-workers in November 1999 in the so-called Xerox shootings.
"This (Arakawa) case caused people to scratch their heads and say, 'What's going on down there' " at the courthouse, Carlisle said.
When Ostendorp took the case, he realized it would be an uphill battle.
"This case was tried in the media, and the verdict was in long before the jury was even selected — that was obvious," Ostendorp said.
If anything, he blames himself for not communicating to the jury more clearly about what he believes the physical evidence in the case showed.
"The (wrecked) cars tell the story. There's the evidence," he said.
For more than a week the prosecution presented its case, with eyewitnesses putting Arakawa at the scene, running a red light. Expert witnesses said Arakawa was drunk, speeding and ran a red light when his Ford Thunderbird slammed into Ambrose's compact sedan.
Ostendorp called his own expert witnesses in an attempt to rebut each of the points the prosecution had made. Experts for the defense said it was Ambrose who was speeding and ran the red light.
One of the defense experts said Ambrose probably wasn't wearing her seat belt or wearing it correctly, contributing to her own death.
But it was the assertion by another expert witness for the defense who said Arakawa was an "experienced drinker" with a "practiced liver" that caused the largest public backlash. The expert testified that Arakawa's liver removed alcohol from his system faster than normal, so Arakawa was not legally drunk at the time of the accident.
In his closing statement, Ostendorp suggested that Ambrose may have been under the influence of drugs. The assertion was not true, according to the autopsy, and her parents were angry it had been raised in court.
Carlisle said Hawai'i prosecutors are legally bound to try to seek the truth in criminal cases, while defense attorneys are given more latitude.
"But just how far a defense attorney is allowed to go in representing a client — I think that's the question here," Carlisle said.
Ostendorp makes no apologies for any aspect of his defense.
"I went out and got the best experts I could find on behalf of my client, people who are nationally recognized in their field," Ostendorp said. "Do I think that statements they made at trial were outrageous? No. I think it is outrageous for Mr. Carlisle or anybody else to characterize anything we did as outrageous."
Ostendorp, 44, immigrated to the United States from Germany in 1980 and graduated from the Northwestern School of Law at Lewis and Clark College near Portland, Ore., in 1989. He set up shop in Hawai'i in 1992, specializing in criminal defense and representing people who believed their civil rights had been violated.
"I am an American by choice, not necessity," Ostendorp said. "I believe in the presumption of innocence for a criminal defendant until proven guilty in court."
The high-profile case was a first for Ostendorp, which he said had left him emotionally and financially drained.
Arakawa's legal troubles are not over yet. Honolulu attorney Rick Fried is suing him on behalf of Ambrose's estate. The case is scheduled to go to trial in April.
The two bars that served Arakawa during the hours leading up to the crash have settled with Ambrose's family for an amount Fried said he could not disclose.
Reach David Waite at dwaite@honoluluadvertiser.com or 525-8030.
