Print friendly
E-mail story
Tip Us Off
iPod friendly
Comments
Bookmark This
del.icio.us.
Digg!
furl
google
newsvine
reddit
technorati
Facebook
Yahoo!On full display in Judge James Rigali's emotionally-charged Santa Maria courtroom Thursday morning, November 19, were two families that loved and cared for their members, and two families whose lives had forever been changed on May 1, 2008, when two cars struck each other.
On one side was the family of Laura Cleaves-a 53-year-old killed when her car was hit head-on, on Highway 154. "Laura was truly a wonderful person," said her husband Stephen, a sergeant with the Santa Barbara County Sheriff's Department until his recent retirement. His wife, mother of their two grown children, worked as a supervising investigator with the District Attorney's office. "She was bigger than life," he said. "She was not only my wife, she was my best friend."
The other family was that of Ashley Johnigan, a now-24-year-old who was driving intoxicated with a 0.24 blood-alcohol level when she slammed her car into Cleaves's that day. In September, a Santa Maria jury found Johnigan guilty of second degree murder, vehicular manslaughter, and two misdemeanor drunken-driving counts. "We appreciate and mourn and grieve with the Cleaves family," said Johnigan's older sister Monyka. From the first day of hearing about who Cleaves was, she said, "We all knew this was someone we could know and be friends with."
But fate intertwined these two families together under different circumstances, and on Thursday the two groups convened for one last go-round. Johnigan's sentencing hearing was a chance for Cleaves's friends and family to share with the judge the impact of losing their wife, mother, friend, colleague and teacher. "Laura was the woman I expected to grow old with," said Senior Deputy DA Aimee Libeu, who described Cleaves as her best friend. For Johnigan's family, it was one last chance to defend their sister, daughter, parishioner, and friend before the judge handed down the sentence. "My sister has good to do in this world on behalf of Laura Cleaves," Monyka Johnigan said.
The testimony from each side clearly took its toll on Judge Rigali, who was obviously torn about the decision he had to make, and said as much after hearing the emotional pleas from both sides-and of Johnigan's remorse from the defendant herself. Rigali had to choose between sentencing Johnigan to either one year in county jail, or 15-years-to-life in prison. These were not ideal options, he said, but he had no say in the charges filed by the prosecution or the strategies used by the defense. "I'm not satisfied with the choices I have," said Rigali, who had earlier denied Johnigan's motion for a retrial as well as a motion to reduce the murder charge. Johnigan's attorney, Robert Sanger, had argued that if ever a case called for such a decision to be made, this is one, because of a disproportion between the crime and the possible sentence of life in prison.
In the end, Rigali chose the 15-years-to-life in prison, meaning Johnigan, 22 when the collision occurred, will be spending at least the next 12 years in prison-she will first be eligible for parole after serving 85 percent of the 15 years. Johnigan will also be expected to pay $1.05 million in lost retirement restitution to the Cleaves family.
Johnigan had been at the Maverick Saloon in Santa Ynez the night of the collision, and was encouraged by others in the bar to get a ride home and not drive herself, according to testimony. But she chose to drive that night, the prosecution argued, and knew what the dangers of drunk driving were.
Johnigan's attorney Robert Sanger argued that she left the bar because she was made to feel uncomfortable by others in the bar, and drove away intending to find a spot to stop and sober up for the night.
She did indeed stop along Highway 154. The defense said she didn't recognize a CHP vehicle that pulled up behind her because the car only had its white lights on. She began driving again and not long after-at approximately 11:30 p.m.-crossed over the double yellow line and crashed into Cleaves's oncoming vehicle. Cleaves, recognized as an expert in child abduction and complex white collar crime cases, died at the scene.
Laura Cleaves
Immediately following her death, Cleaves-who had been at the DA's office since 1984-was remembered fondly as a funny and insightful woman who cared about her community and family, who rode horses and taught children to ride as well. The Santa Barbara law enforcement community was hit hard by her death, as she could always be counted on for the tough cases.
Johnigan herself addressed the court Thursday, but directed her comments almost entirely to Stephen Cleaves. "I don't really know if sorry is the word to use in this case," Johnigan said, standing and turning to address Cleaves, tears running down her face, dressed in blue jail-issued scrubs. "I just want you guys to know-everyone in this court, especially her husband-that I am deeply sorry for taking your wife from you.
Santa Maria Times/ Bryan Walton
Ashley Johnigan speaks to Stephen Cleaves before being sentenced for her role in the DUI crash that killed Laura Cleaves. 11/19/09
"If ever I could have the honor of speaking with you eye to eye I would be so willing," she told Cleaves as almost everyone in the courtroom began crying. "I hope that one day you can breathe without so much pain."
Outside the courtroom, Deputy Attorney General Michael Keller, whose office handled the prosecution because of the Santa Barbara County DA's obvious conflict, didn't comment, citing a gag order, while Sanger would only say that he plans to file a notice of appeal.
While Stephen Cleaves gathered with supporters and wiped tears from his eyes, Johnigan's mother came up to him. Only a few words were exchanged, but their mutual sorrow-for different loved ones-was evident as they embraced.
Related Links
Double-clicking on any word or phrase in this story will open a reference window with definitions and links to other reference material.
Previous Month
Comments
Discussion Guidelines
Jeschke a person who will probably never change gets a free pass with probation, but Johnigan who would probably never drink again gets life in prison. Am I the only one who thinks justice is not being served here? BTW 15 to life means she has to serve 15 years before she is eligible for parole, then the governor of CA has to approve her being paroled. Good luck trying to be a model prisoner when you are surrounded by other lifers who probably don't have a chance to ever get out. Its either get victimize or get victimized.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 7:44 a.m. (Suggest removal)
AZ, something is SERIOUSLY wrong w/ the system as it stands. I think in the Jeschke case, even though what he did was MESSED UP, there were circumstances that were considered, such as the "victim's" willingness to participate. Still, that's NO excuse for the guy to walk away w/ probie only. However, if he gets the "sexual predator/offender" label, that guy's life is a life sentence of it's own. Still, the system needs fixing, no doubt & the disparity in punishment for the crime is apparent :) henry
hank (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 9:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You are right in a way, but the fact still remains that Jeschke abused of the position he was in. He wasn't just some guy off the street but somebody of authority over these girls; how could they deny him? Johnigan I agree should do time, but it should be a determinate sentence. No matter what number they put in front of the "L" it stil is an "L". That means you can be their until you die.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 10:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Great reporting Chris.
A sad and cautionary tale well told.
binky (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The disparities in the Johnnigan trial are blaring. Here is a repentant 22 year old with no prior D.U.I's who voluntarily spent 1 year in rehab after the incident receiving a life sentence! Even the judge admitted he was given limited choices. Justice was not certainly not served in this case.
azureblue (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 12:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
A completely unfair and racist sentence. Someone should ask President Obama to include her on his presidential pardon list. Please!
elisheva (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 1:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Several things come to mind here: Binky's comment alone pretty much sums it up--especially that this is a cautionary tale. Our culture is fixated on alcohol: Just about any fundraiser, groundbreaking ceremony, company party, gathering of literati and so forth includes the requisite serving of alcohol to people who will get behind the wheel. With such an attitude afloat, is it any wonder why people don't get it that drinking and driving (yes, even a slight amount of booze can render one dangerous) don't mix?
So here we are...yet again...a young woman who lacked the common sense to not do an incredibly foolish thing because in part her behavior is reinforced by the booze culture in which she grew up, and a woman is dead because of it.
As for the accusations of being racist, I can't say yes or no on that one, but I agree with those who say our system is inconsistent in it's policies. As proof of this, I submit the following link to The Independent's coverage of the Heather Hulsey case: This is the woman who was spared any jail time by judge Frank Ochoa (who remains in power) because after hitting and killing a man while she was drunk Ochoa felt sorry for her because she got pregnant.
The bloggers who already know this will hopefully bear with me on this but I have to remind everyone that even when one is under the legal limit of 0.08 one can still be dangerous and held legally responsible if they cause an accident. This was the case where a man with a 0.069 blood alcohol reading ran into my dad a few years ago. The court determined that alcohol was a factor in the crash.
It's real simple: Don't drink and drive.
Here is the story of how drunk driver Heather Hulsey avoided jail time:
http://www.independent.com/news/2008/...
billclausen (anonymous profile)
November 20, 2009 at 3:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Appears to me that Ashley's next mistake, after drinking and driving, was not getting Judge Ochoa.
ahem (anonymous profile)
November 23, 2009 at 12:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)
playing the race card here is ridiculous and insulting. if anything this is an issue of sexism (the ochoa case too). i personally cannot picture a man getting the same tearful sympathy after killing someone while driving drunk. sentences are not based on the number of tears shed by the defendant, a man would certainly be doing 15 to life and you would all be applauding the verdict.
rcobban (anonymous profile)
November 23, 2009 at 2:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The murder charge was bogus. The only reason she was charged with murder is because she killed someone who worked for the District Attorney's office.
buckwheat (anonymous profile)
November 23, 2009 at 9:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
No, last anyone checked Laura Cleaves is really dead, so being charged with killing someone is not really bogus.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 23, 2009 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Bill has it correct; the Indy should do a follow-up report on the difference between Heather Hulsey/Ashley Johnigan verdicts.
danielsb805 (anonymous profile)
November 23, 2009 at 6:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)
15 years to life = 12 years minimum. That's what a life is worth when someone intentionally drives drunk?
When are we going to finally get Medieval on drunk diver's asses and stop this senseless carnage?
This murderer may serve 12 years for the tragically shortened life of Laura Cleaves, but she'll have to complete a sentence of abject stupidity for the rest of her pathetic days.
May they pass slowly, inexorably, allowing her ample, if wasted, time to reflect on what she did.
Draxor (anonymous profile)
November 24, 2009 at 7:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
She has to do 15 years, I don't know where the reporter got their info. but its 15 not 12. While they serve you dessert and let you watch T.V. being in prison is not a pleasant punishment. Just because you wrap doo-doo in a nice package doesn't make it a treat.
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 24, 2009 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)
AZ2SB: Murder is not the only way to charge someone who has killed someone else, for your information. The D.A. could have charged her with gross vehicular manslaughter which would have been more appropriate.
buckwheat (anonymous profile)
November 25, 2009 at 9:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Gross vehicular manslaughter is still murder. Someone dying because it was intentional or by making the wrong decisions like drinking and driving is still murder. Now if the car malfunctioned that changes things. I also believe the sentence wasn't right. and maybe the fact that the victim worked for the D.A.'s office doesn't help, but drinking and driving kills. It kills alot of people. What do you suggest we do to stop people from engaging in this behavior?
AZ2SB (anonymous profile)
November 25, 2009 at 2:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)