The prosecution’s case against Larry Millete took 24 days to deliver and called 66 witnesses to the stand. The defense only needed a single day and questioned just three of its own witnesses. Millete is accused of murdering his wife, Maya, in 2021 and disposing of her body, which has never been found. He’s maintained his innocence since she vanished. Ultimately, Larry Millete was not called to the stand to testify in his own defense. After the defense rested, Judge Enrique Camarena specifically asked Larry whether he understood he had a right to testify and decided not to on his own. “I am personally deciding not to testify,” Millete answered. Defense attorney Liann Sabatini speaks during a status hearing for Larry Millete on Jan. 8, 2024. The defendant sits between her and defense attorney Colby Ryan. Larry’s defense attorneys, Colby Ryan and Liann Sabatini, began the day’s testimony by calling two volunteers with the San Diego County Sheriff’s Office Search and Rescue team. Those two witnesses, who are married, are both K9 handlers who were asked to use their dogs to potentially detect human remains at the Millete home. Stacy and Steve Agan have both worked with search dogs for decades and said they are primarily asked to search for missing hikers in wilderness areas and aren’t typically called to work on criminal cases. Both testified that they gave their dogs commands to detect human remains on Jan. 23, 2021, at the Millete residence. Jurors learned that collectively, the dogs BJ and Kona searched the interior of the house, its garage, and the backyard, but didn’t detect any human remains or bodily fluids from decomposition. What jurors didn’t hear was that both dogs also conducted a search of the family’s black Lexus SUV. That’s because a special hearing was held this morning, outside the presence of the jury, where the prosecution, defense, and even the judge questioned Stacy Agan about what she would be testifying to. During that hearing, it was revealed that the K9 handlers told investigators they didn’t want to search the home or SUV. Agan said that’s because the dogs were not trained to detect any lingering odors from where a decomposing body had been, and were only used to find actual physical remains.  Previously, testimony has indicated that investigators believe Larry transported Maya’s body in that SUV away from the home on Jan. 8, 2021, where he dumped it in the desert on or near a Native American reservation. They’ve also presented evidence of multiple car washes and cleanings of the vehicle in the days that followed. The jury also didn’t hear about another point of contention from the special hearing, relating to how long a body takes to begin significantly decomposing, leaving behind fluid evidence. Judge Camarena said no scientific testimony had been presented thus far about that topic, so questions about that were barred from being asked. Likewise, the judge prevented questions about the SUV because the dogs were never certified to conduct searches of vehicles, so the accuracy of the searches wouldn’t be allowed as evidence that Maya’s body was or was not in the SUV. Defense pushes theory that Maya ran away and wasn’t murdered An undated picture of Larry Maya Millete. Finally, the defense called Riley Mallory to the stand. He’s a private investigator who previously worked for the San Diego County Public Defender’s Office, helping defense attorneys build cases in support of suspects. Through his testimony, Mallory went through dozens of exhibits that revealed the precise locations of all the home surveillance cameras in the San Miguel Ranch neighborhood and the angles they captured. The apparent goal of the testimony – to push the narrative that Maya may have left the home of her own accord, or someone else may have entered to harm her. “I was asked to evaluate if it would be possible for an individual to leave or enter the residence without being captured on surveillance video,” Mallory testified. During questioning, Mallory acknowledged that his methodology and video evidence from the cameras themselves created limitations. “It’s an approximation,” Mallory said. “It’s my best effort. It’s inherently different, and I wanted to caveat that it is an approximation … it’s much harder to get a clear estimate how far from each camera was usefully visible.” To continue building on the possibility that Maya left on her own, or another person found a way inside undetected, the defense showed a series of photographs of the backyard of the Milette home. Mallory testified that it was possible Maya used a small wall to climb on top of an outdoor fireplace stove, which helped her to get over a fence, then down into a drainage ditch leading to a hiking trail that flowed out of the neighborhood. This map illustration, created by NBC 7, shows where a drainage ditch connects to a hiking trial near the former home of Larry Maya Millete. Mallory went into detail about other potential pathways out of the neighborhood, including trails that led to a neighborhood park and also a shuttered golf course. Photos were shown of many of the potential pathways. During cross-examination, Deputy District Attorney Christy Bowles challenged Mallory’s testimony based on several factors. That included the fact that his camera analysis and photo experiment took place on two separate dates, years after Maya vanished. Bowles asked him if he knew about differences in camera angles, foliage changes, or lighting conditions. Mallory answered that he didn’t have that information. What’s next for the trial and jury deliberations Judge Enrique Camarena rules against a motion from Larry Millete’s defense attorney at a status hearing on January 8, 2024. Judge Camarena told the jurors that they’ll be given instructions for deliberations and then hear closing arguments beginning Tuesday morning. Depending on how long closings go, they could begin those deliberations before the day ends. The judge said there are several reasons for the delay. The first being that all the evidence presented during the trial must be catalogued for jury deliberations. Additionally, the court is closed on Friday for the holiday weekend. On Monday, attorneys for both sides will hash out the exact wording of the jury instructions with the judge. As it’s been for the entire trial, cameras won’t be allowed during closing arguments for the verdict. NBC 7, along with a coalition of media outlets, sent the court a letter asking Judge Camarena to reconsider his decision to not allow recording. In his decision to deny the request, the judge expressed his appreciation to the media for following his ruling throughout the trial, but said the letter didn’t sway his concerns that audiovisual coverage could impact the jury’s ability to deliver justice. “It doesn’t move my needle or change the concerns that I have,” Judge Camarena said. “My job is to protect the integrity of what we’re doing here from outside influence … so the jury focuses on their task.” ...read more read less