Left with a ‘void,’ families of SLO couple killed by driver feel let down by justice system
This year marked the third Thanksgiving Jennifer Besser’s and Matthew Chachere’s family will be spending the holidays without them.
On Nov. 22, 2022, two days before Thanksgiving, the two were supposed to arrive at Chachere’s parents’ house in Modesto but were instead found dead in a creekbed at the 3400 block of Sacramento Drive. Police discovered they had been hit by a car and launched into the adjacent wooded area while walking their dog the evening before.
The driver of the car, Daniel Saligan Patricio, pleaded guilty to two counts of vehicular manslaughter and was sentenced to five years and four months in state prison in April.
The court process had been traumatizing for both Besser’s and Chachere’s families. Ernest Chachere told The Tribune in April he was glad they got the most accountability allowed under the law.
But three weeks later, Ernest told The Tribune in November, a letter from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation informed the family that Saligan Patricio would be released in December 2026 — after serving half of his sentence.
That detail came as a surprise to the Chacheres.
“It really upset me that we were never told that,” Linda Chachere, Matthew’s mother, said, adding that if she had known how little of his sentence Saligan Patricio would actually have to serve, she would have advocated harder for a higher charge that was considered a violent crime.
California sentencing laws allow inmates to serve less time in prison if they have good behavior. For violent crimes, inmates must serve at least two-thirds of their sentence, and for nonviolent crimes, inmates must serve at least half. Vehicular manslaughter is considered a nonviolent crime.
Finding out Saligan Patricio’s release date prompted the Chacheres, with the support of Besser’s mother, Pati Blevins, to write a letter to the California Attorney’s General Office and Gov. Gavin Newsom in August, sharing their experience and concerns with how they were treated through the court process. The agencies had not responded as of Wednesday.
As part of its Reality Check series, The Tribune looked into how California law affects criminal manslaughter cases.
Driver admitted to drinking earlier that day. Why didn’t he get a DUI?
In the letter, which the family shared with The Tribune, the Chacheres describe the crime against Matthew and Jennifer, along with the frustrating experience they had in the legal proceedings that followed.
“We really strongly felt that they should understand our experiences through (the letter) and how frustrating it was,” Ernest said. “We really got a close look firsthand, unfortunately, of the justice system and frankly none of it was very good.”
One of the first ways the families felt let down was the fact that the responding San Luis Obispo police officer, David Brewer, did not conduct a sobriety test on Saligan Patricio at the time of the incident.
At the preliminary hearing in November 2023, the officer testified that Saligan Patricio denied drinking alcohol, did not exhibit any obvious signs of intoxication during their 30 minute interview at the scene, and his vehicle did not smell like alcohol.
After Besser’s and Chachere’s bodies were found, San Luis Obispo police Det. Jeffrey Koznek also interviewed Saligan Patricio, who admitted to drinking alcohol while at work earlier in the day and throwing a tequila bottle into the creekbed after the crash.
San Luis Obispo County Assistant District Attorney Eric Dobroth said police officers are trained to recognize signs of drivers being under the influence, particularly when they are investigating collisions.
“We’re left with the situation that the officer, who’s a trained observer, is interacting with Mr. Saligan Patricio for maybe 20 to 30 minutes,” Dobroth said. “He was emotional, but the officer didn’t note any cues of impairment from alcohol, right? So it’s a tough one.”
Saligan Patricio’s conduct after the crash, like watery eyes and being emotional, could be interpreted as signs of impairment, Dobroth said, but could also be consistent with someone who just experienced a traumatic crash.
He added that the officers not finding signs of impairment at the time of the crash led him to believe, based on the available evidence, that he was not impaired. He said he appreciates the families’ frustrations, but can’t say with any certainty that alcohol was a contributing factor to the crash.
Saligan Patricio’s defense attorney, Ilan Funke-Bilu, agreed the evidence showed his client was not driving under the influence, adding that the admission to drinking earlier in the day and throwing a bottle is not proof his client was under the influence at the time of the crash.
“Is it the cops’ fault? No. Is it the system’s fault? No. I mean, none of the witnesses saw anybody flying off over the bridge. He didn’t see it,” Funke-Bilu said. “It was evidence of a crash, but no evidence that bodies were contacted.”
He added that the incident was a tragedy.
Why the SLO DA charged manslaughter instead of murder
Homicide can be charged as two crimes under California law: murder and manslaughter.
Murder requires an intent to kill, while manslaughter does not. One exception would be voluntary manslaughter, which Dobroth described as a mitigated first-degree murder charge that involves some kind provocation, heat of passion and intent to kill.
Another exception, Implied malice murder, is charged when a person knowingly engages in dangerous activity that shows a conscious disregard for human life.
This could be driving under the influence, Dobroth said, but someone’s pre-collision conduct “that would give you a reality check to the dangerousness or to the dangers of your driving,” like hitting a fence or running a stop sign, could also show whether the person knew they were driving dangerously and continued anyway.
Speeding and texting while driving is inherently dangerous, but the difference is whether Saligan Patricio was doing so with personal awareness or with negligence.
For Saligan Patricio, Dobroth said, evidence didn’t show he was intending to be dangerous or had explicit insight his behavior was dangerous when he was speeding and texting at the level that would rise to implied malice murder.
Gross vehicular manslaughter requires gross negligence, meaning the driver had a reckless disregard for human life. This is defined from an objective point of view, Dobroth said, meaning a reasonable person would know the driving was dangerous. It’s similar to involuntary manslaughter, which is charged when a defendant is accused of homicide by engaging in behavior that has a reckless disregard for human life.
During the preliminary hearing, evidence showed Saligan Patricio was driving 43 mph five seconds before the collision, but then accelerated and allegedly hit the couple at a speed of 61 miles per hour — about three times the speed limit posted in the area.
Saligan Patricio did not brake, according to his vehicle’s data, and he had told Koznek he was looking at a text message from his wife at the time of the crash.
Manslaughter isn’t a violent crime under CA law. What does that mean for a prison sentence?
Saligan Patricio entered an open guilty plea, meaning he agreed to all the charges the District Attorney’s Office accused him of without negotiating a possible sentence prior.
“Ninety-nine percent of my cases, either a jury determines their guilt or innocence or it’s settled. I don’t remember the last time I did an open plea, and especially in as serious a case as this,” Funke-Bilu said.
Sentencing for manslaughter is on a three-tier system, with a two-, four-or six-year sentence. In order for a defendant to be eligible for a maximum sentence, at least one aggravating factor has to found true. Factors of mitigation, like being under 26 or having no criminal history, can qualify a defendant for a lower term.
Saligan Patricio did not agree to two factors of aggravation at the time of his plea but eventually did by the time of his sentencing. If he did not agree, there would have been a jury trial to decide whether the crime caused great bodily injury and whether Chachere and Besser were vulnerable.
San Luis Obispo Superior Court Judge Michael Frye sought insight from the Probation Department, District Attorney’s Office, Funke-Bilu and the Besser and Chachere families prior to Saligan Patricio’s sentencing and ultimately considered one factor of aggravation: The victims of the crime were particularly vulnerable.
The families of Besser and Chachere “were taken aback” by Frye dropping the second factor, they wrote in the letter to the Attorney General’s Office, and had hoped it would have made the judge consider the highest sentence, seven years and four months.
Ultimately, Saligan Patricio was sentenced to the middle term, five years and four months, on April 9.
At the sentencing hearing, Saligan Patricio apologized to Besser’s and Chachere’s families.
“I just want to express my deepest apologies and condolences to the Besser and Chachere families and friends,” he told the families. “I know I can’t comprehend the pain and suffering. I know I can’t undo the tragedy that I have caused, as much as I wish every day that I could. For this, I want to say I am sorry.”
The families found this apology to be “emotionless” and speculated the statement was written by Funke-Bilu. Funke-Bilu denied this, telling The Tribune that Saligan Patricio wrote the statement himself.
“There was a stoicism to him that I think was misinterpreted by the family as emotionless,” Funke-Bilu said. “The reason why he plead guilty and the reason why he admitted to the aggravating factors is because he felt completely responsible, and he felt, according to his religion, he has to accept responsibility.“
Three weeks after the sentencing, the family received notification that Saligan Patricio could be released as soon as December 2026, possibly earlier if he is eligible for certain programs. While Saligan Patricio’s convictions were serious crimes, meaning they count as strikes under the California Three Strikes law, they were not violent crimes, so he was eligible to serve half his sentence rather than two-thirds.
Both the Chacheres and Blevins found this information extremely distressing, and said they were not told about the custody credits at any point in the court process. Dobroth told The Tribune he personally was not part of conversations with the families regarding custody credits, but he added that California sentencing laws are constantly changing.
“I can’t, with a level of confidence that would make me comfortable, look a victim in the eye and tell them, this is when the person is going to get out or this is how much time they will have to serve,” he said.
The families were notified that Saligan Patricio was appealing his sentence on Nov. 25, which added more pain to the third-year anniversary of Besser and Chachere’s deaths, they told The Tribune. Because Saligan Patricio has a different lawyer for his appeal, Funke-Bilu did not know what arguments Saligan Patricio may be considering.
His appellate brief is due in court on Dec. 20.
Deaths leave ‘void’ in family holiday celebrations
In the end, Dobroth said, the criminal justice system in this case worked as it was designed.
But that doesn’t diminish the families’ experiences or concerns, he said, adding that the system can always improve.
“Accountability in the law is not a function of the outcome (of the crime), because whether or not an individual commits a misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter or they commit a second-degree implied malice murder, if they killed someone, they killed someone,” he said. “The law focuses on the circumstances of the crime, the circumstances particular to this individual defendant and their mental state at the time.”
While the system worked for Saligan Patricio, the Chacheres and Blevins feel it failed them as victims.
“I feel like we’ve let our kids down,” Pati Blevins, Besser’s mother, told The Tribune. “I don’t know how else to put it. The judicial system has let us down, and they’ve let our kids down. It’s just not fair.”
They hope sharing their experience leads to changes that can better serve victims and victims’ families.
The families remember Matthew and Jennifer for their loving, 11-year relationship — they were polar opposites who worked perfectly together, according to Ernest — along with their kindness, passion for outdoors and care for their dog, Buddy, who was also killed in the crash.
On the anniversary of their deaths on Nov. 21 this year, Blevins and Linda Chachere visited their children’s memorial, which was dedicated in October 2023, on Sacramento Drive to decorate it with wreaths and ornaments adorned with photographs of their children’s lives.
“It’s hard to go there, but it’s extremely hard to leave,” Linda Chachere said. “It feels like you’ve left them behind.”
Blevins told The Tribune she wanted to honor her daughter and Matthew, especially since they loved Christmas.
“I hope the community knows that not only did we lose our kids, but that this was an injustice for anybody that could be in the same situation,” she said.
The holiday season was a favorite of the couple. The two hadn’t missed a holiday with the Chacheres since 2012, Linda Chachere said, adding that Jennifer was always particular about what food would be served.
Now, their families are still adjusting to the holidays without them.
“I’m not going to celebrate the holidays. I don’t even want to think about them,” Pati Blevins, Besser’s mother, told The Tribune. “I thought I could, but I just miss her.”
The Chacheres won’t be celebrating the holidays either, they said.
“The reason the holiday brings in so much joy is because you do it around your family,” Ernest Chachere, Matthew’s father, said. “Now, with the void that’s left, it’s very difficult for us to feel that same closeness.”
This story was originally published December 11, 2024 at 5:00 AM.
