SLO jury disagrees on attempted rape charges against Atascadero man accused of 2 attacks
A San Luis Obispo jury found an Atascadero man guilty of attempted kidnapping and assault for a 2018 attack on a woman following a car crash, but jurors could not agree whether the man was tied to an alleged home invasion-styled attack on a Cal Poly student in her apartment five months earlier.
Tyrone Anderson faced six felonies and the possibility of spending the rest of his life in state prison for the separate pair of allegedly sexually motivated attacks that his defense attorney claimed were “completely disconnected” events.
In San Luis Obispo Superior Court Wednesday, a jury of 11 women and one man found Anderson indeed attacked the second woman involved in the car crash in May 2018 and attempted to kidnap her, but disagreed with the District Attorney Office’s argument that the kidnapping was an attempt to rape the woman.
At least two jurors had reasonable doubt about whether Anderson committed the alleged home invasion of a 20-year-old Cal Poly student in her San Luis Obispo apartment in December 2017, after the defense presented evidence calling into question whether that attack even happened.
The Tribune is not identifying either woman because they are alleged victims of sexual violence.
The jury on Wednesday found Anderson not guilty of the charged crime of kidnapping with intent to commit rape, but found him guilty of a lesser offense of attempted kidnapping. They also found him guilty of assault likely to cause great bodily injury and assault with a deadly weapon, all related to the May 2018 incident.
But on the three felony charges related to the alleged home invasion of the Cal Poly student in 2017 — assault with intent to commit rape, sexual battery, and first-degree burglary — the jury deadlocked and Superior Court Judge Craig van Rooyen declared a mistrial as to those counts.
As van Rooyen announced the deadlock and a court clerk read the not guilty verdicts on the other most serious charge (kidnapping with intent to commit rape), Anderson was visibly emotional and his eyes welled up with tears as defense attorney Patrick Fisher held him by the shoulder in support.
The jury foreman reported to van Rooyen that the jury deadlocked 10-1-1 (with one juror undecided) on all three undecided counts, though it was not said in court whether the majority favored guilt or acquittal.
Despite discussing the verdicts outside the courtroom with members of the prosecution team and the defense, the jury foreperson declined to comment on deliberations with The Tribune.
The District Attorney’s Office declined to issue a statement regarding the verdicts, but chief deputy district attorney Lisa Muscari, who prosecuted the case, said outside the courtroom that the agency plans to seek a second trial.
Fisher said late Thursday afternoon that he and his client are extremely pleased that the jury rejected the kidnapping charge, which carried a life sentence, and said that they’re confident in their ability to prove Anderson’s innocence in the alleged attack on the Cal Poly student without the jury considering the kidnapping attempt in Atascadero.
“We feel very positive about our chances going forward against the (alleged Cal Poly student assault) because next time, the picture isn’t going to be muddied up by this unrelated (Atascadero) incident,” Fisher said. “We were fighting two battles at once.”
The verdict followed a three-week trial in which jurors heard tense and highly emotional testimony from the two alleged victims, as well as a host of San Luis Obispo police detectives and officers, and from Anderson himself.
Jurors also soldiered on with the proceedings as fears about coronavirus rapidly shut down much of the courthouse in the last week of the trial.
Anderson has remained in San Luis Obispo County Jail without bail since his arrest in May 2018.
Fisher said the maximum sentence for three charges Anderson was convicted of is four years in state prison. Anderson has already served about two years in County Jail.
He is scheduled to be sentenced for those charges May 11, when there will also be a trial setting conference for the three charges the jury hung on.
It is not clear whether the court will order Anderson to begin serving his sentence before or after his second trial.
People v. Tyrone Anderson at a glance
Tied to the 2017 attack primarily by DNA evidence and to the second attack months later by eyewitnesses, Anderson was described by chief deputy district attorney Lisa Muscari as someone who “needs dominance and control over women,” whether the victim is known to him or is a stranger in their own home.
But Anderson’s attorney, Patrick Fisher, told the jury in his closing statements that Anderson had nothing to do with the alleged attack on the Cal Poly student, who according to evidence shown during trial considered “scamming men” her “new hobby,” and who Fisher claimed faked the home invasion, winning over San Luis Obispo police detectives investigating the crime despite their initial doubts about her story.
Fisher and Anderson both told jurors that the second alleged attack, was the result of a misunderstanding that turned physical following a roadside fender-bender with a former co-worker with whom he had a previous sexual encounter.
Anderson was arrested May 7, 2018, for that assault after a passerby intervened and pulled Anderson away from the woman, who was laying in the back seat.
The man later testified that Anderson had a knife in his hand when he pulled him out of the car and Anderson fled the scene in his damaged car.
Anderson was spotted by a witness returning to the scene, and a foot chase with police ensued, ending in Anderson’s arrest in a nearby neighborhood.
His car had been parked in a nearby driveway, and he was dressed in different clothes at the time of his arrest. He was also suffering from a “serious” gash on the back of his right hand that required stitches.
The woman testified she suffered scrapes, bruises, and a slight cut on her head. She described being certain that if she allowed him to force her into his car, Anderson was going to rape and kill her.
The woman testified that the two had worked together about six months prior at a local discount store, and shared a one-time sexual encounter. She said he had never exhibited violence towards her in the past.
Days after the arrest, San Luis Obispo police announced that DNA evidence had linked Anderson to the Dec. 4, 2017, alleged attack on the then-20-year-old Cal Poly student in her Foothill Boulevard apartment, which the department had been investigating for five months.
In that alleged incident, the woman was alone in her two-bedroom, first-floor apartment on Foothill Boulevard she shared with a roommate, who was out for the night, she testified March 3.
While dressing in her room after taking a shower, the woman was startled from the sound of a stun gun in her living room, she told jurors. Thinking there was an electrical fire, she ran out, naked, and was confronted by a man wearing an over-sized leather jacket and black gloves, standing in the dark, she testified.
The woman said the man put his hand over her mouth and held her from behind while he bound her wrists and ankles with duct tape. The victim told investigators that the man then rubbed lubrication on her body and tried to sexually assault her on her bed.
The woman pleaded with her attacker and told him that she was a virgin, she testified, before she suddenly heard the man exiting through the apartment’s front door.
Jurors were shown a responding officer’s body camera footage showing the panicked woman opening the front door for officers with her wrists tied behind her back.
The tape needed to be cut with scissors by the officer, but was then left exposed on a counter top for a period as investigators processed the scene. Another piece of tape the woman said was placed over her mouth was left lying on the floor carpet, witnesses testified.
Investigating officers testified that they were initially “puzzled” how the woman could remove the tape from her mouth and ankles and call police and open the front door without assistance. But detectives attempted to repeat the tape removal on themselves and were successful, they testified.
There were no eyewitnesses to the alleged home invasion, and officers canvassed the neighborhood and brought in a search dog but were unable to locate a suspect.
During his testimony, Muscari disclosed to the jury that Anderson had previously been sentenced to two years in state prison in 2012 after a no contest plea to a felony charge of inflicting corporal injury to a spouse or cohabitant.
‘DNA evidence doesn’t lie’
In her closing statement to the jury Monday, which continued on Tuesday, Muscari described Anderson as a “master manipulator” who prepared for both alleged attacks and was determined to carry out scenarios he had been “fantasizing” about.
“Make no mistake, the defendant is a sexual predator,” Muscari told jurors.
She took on the defense’s argument that the Cal Poly student staged the event, telling jurors that the woman seen crying hysterically in the officer’s bodycam footage “had just went under a very stressful situation,” but was “methodical” and “very calm” when asked to explain details of what happened.
“You’d have to think she was faking all that (to find Anderson not guilty),” Muscari said. “But she wasn’t faking — he terrorized her.”
Muscari said that the DNA evidence is indisputable in linking Anderson the the attack, noting that his DNA was found on the edge of a piece of duct tape — possibly from him tearing it with his mouth, she said — carried a 1 in 36 sextillion chance of error.
“DNA evidence doesn’t lie,” Muscari said, calling Anderson’s defense “just not probable.”
She told jurors that the DNA of the unidentified third individual from that sample was “so minor a trace” as to be insignificant.
Regarding the attack on the Atascadero woman, Muscari conceded that prosecutors “don’t know why” Anderson chose to kidnap her after never previously showing signs of aggression.
Defense highlights inconsistencies in the case
In his closing argument Monday and Tuesday, Fisher called the two alleged attacks “completely disconnected” and accused investigators of trying to pin the December 2017 attack on Anderson because they couldn’t find any other suspects and because the San Luis Obispo police detective assigned as the Cal Poly student’s point of contact developed an “agenda.”
The defense played back the bodycam footage of the Cal Poly student’s first interactions with officers in which she’s seen hysterically walking an officer around the apartment, pointing out items and discussing things that normally wouldn’t be relevant under the circumstances.
“It’s like she’s got it in her mind to point out the different pieces of evidence she’s left for them,” Fisher told the jury. “She’s not concerned with trying to find this person (who attacked her).”
The woman is shown on the video rapidly explaining to the officer how she removed the tape from her mouth, saying “the saliva breaks down the polymers” on the tape. The woman told investigators that she is a big fan of true crime documentaries, Fisher pointed out.
“It’s like she’s almost expecting him to be skeptical,” Fisher said.
In addition, Fisher said looking closely at the footage showed that the woman was holding her own wrists to keep a small amount of tape in place around them.
Though the woman said her attacker applied lubrication on her, investigators never tested her body to confirm that, Fisher said.
The woman also lied on the stand, Fisher said, such as denying she was on academic probation on the night of the alleged attack, contradicting other witness testimony. Also while on the stand, the woman claimed she knew Anderson was her attacker because the attacker “had a lazy eye.” Anderson, who was seated feet away from the woman, does not have a lazy eye.
There were also discrepancies in her description of her attacker and Anderson: The woman initially said the suspect was in his 20’s, but on the stand she said he was in his 30s.
The woman also initially identified other men to SLOPD Det. Suzie Walsh, who was assigned as her handler, over the five months of investigation, including men that could not reasonably be mistaken for Anderson.
“This is exactly what you would expect if nothing actually happened,” Fisher said. “But close enough, right? Well, close enough isn’t good enough for a criminal case.”
Fisher suggested that Walsh and other investigators were duped by the alleged victim, who Fisher said likely became aware of Anderson’s alleged attempted kidnapping of the Atascadero woman “and figured she wants to put this monster away.”
Editor’s Note: This article has been updated to include comments by defense attorney Patrick Fisher.
This story was originally published March 19, 2020 at 2:21 PM.
