San Diego, California – A former Marine, Raymond Samuel McLeod Jr., charged with the 2016 strangulation death of his girlfriend, Krystal Mitchell, will get a new hearing to determine whether his case should head to trial. This comes after his attorneys claimed prosecutors failed to turn over crucial evidence that could potentially exonerate him.
Background of the Case:
McLeod, 41, was originally ordered to stand trial for Mitchell’s death in October. However, his defense team argued that the killing was accidental and occurred during rough, consensual sex.
During the preliminary hearing, McLeod’s lawyers presented evidence of his past sexual history, including instances of consensual choking during sex with previous partners, to support the claim that Mitchell’s death was an unintended result of sexual activity.
The Discovery Issue:
In a recently filed motion, McLeod’s attorneys stated that they were not provided with key evidence from Mitchell’s cell phone and computer before the hearing.
The evidence reportedly shows that Mitchell also shared an interest in choking during sex, which they argue could have significantly altered the defense’s strategy.
The prosecutor, Deputy District Attorney Franciesca Balerio, admitted that the failure to turn over the evidence was a mistake but did not believe it would have changed the outcome of the preliminary hearing.
Despite this, she suggested dismissing the current case and refiling a new murder charge, thus giving the defense the opportunity to present the new evidence.
Defense’s Argument:
McLeod, who remains in custody without bail, pleaded not guilty to the new murder charge. His attorneys continue to argue for a dismissal of the case or a reduction to a lesser charge, such as involuntary manslaughter.
They stress that the failure to disclose the evidence puts McLeod at a significant disadvantage, both financially and legally, as it would require the case to go through the preliminary hearing process again.
One of McLeod’s defense attorneys, Alison Triessl, emphasized that the evidence mishandling was not intentional, but reiterated that the need to go through the hearing again presents major challenges for McLeod, who has already spent several years in custody awaiting trial.
The Allegations Against McLeod:
Prosecutors argue that McLeod’s actions on the night of Mitchell’s death indicated an intent to murder her. They point to his behavior in a bar before the incident, where McLeod allegedly became physical with Mitchell, prompting intervention from bystanders.
Additionally, surveillance footage from the apartment complex where Mitchell died shows McLeod placing his hand on her throat as they entered an elevator together.
McLeod’s flight from the country after Mitchell’s death is also cited as evidence of his guilt.
Following her death, McLeod spent six years on the run and was later arrested in El Salvador in 2022, where he had been teaching English under a false name. McLeod was added to the U.S. Marshals’ 15 Most Wanted List during this time.
Read Also: 17-Year-Old Charged After Uncle Dies from Beating Tied to Sleepover Dispute
Defense’s Rebuttal:
McLeod’s defense team has contested these claims, arguing that the alleged physical interactions were misunderstood without the context of the couple’s sexual history.
They point to messages and memes shared between McLeod and Mitchell, which they believe demonstrate that the choking behavior was consensual and not a precursor to violence.
Additionally, McLeod’s attorneys argue that there were no signs of a struggle or any evidence of Mitchell resisting or fighting back. While they concede that McLeod should have called 911 immediately, they assert that his flight does not necessarily imply guilt but rather reflects a panicked decision.
What’s Next:
The next preliminary hearing is scheduled for October, and McLeod faces 25 years to life in state prison if convicted on the new murder charge.
What are your thoughts on this case? Should McLeod be allowed to present this new evidence, and how does it affect your view of his potential guilt or innocence? Let us know your perspective!
For more updates on this case and others, visit ridgecrestpact.org
