When It Came To Blows

Scott Rhodes and Pablo Gonzales shared an apartment at 234 Clara Avenue, Ukiah, until March 21st, when they got into a fight, allegedly instigated by Pablo’s father, Pablo Gonzales, Sr.

Keep in mind this is Scott’s story: He put it all on his smart phone and even posted it up on Facebook before coming to court to make his accusations from the witness stand in a preliminary hearing last week, indicting Pablo Gonzales, Sr. for assault with a loaded gun.

It’s Mr. Rhodes’ story, but to tell it the way he did would take up the entire eight pages of this newspaper, and I mean no discredit to him, but it’s more complex than many people think to get on the stand and say what happened, even with a skilled prosecutor to lead you through it. So in the interest of time and space, if not justice, we’ll cut to the nib of the matter.

Rhodes had gotten his teeth knocked out earlier at the Perkins Street bar, and he’s pressing charges against his assailants. The assailants for their part know well where Rhodes lives, and that his roommate is young Pablo Gonzales. On March 21st when the teeth removal team saw Pablo, Jr. and his father Pablo, Sr. at Safeway they went over and made some threats against the father and son, no doubt in an effort to get the charges Rhodes has brought, dropped. Calling them snitches, no doubt, because if you don’t let bullies beat and coerce you, you are nothing but a worthless snitch: Makes perfect sense, and just goes to show how honorable thugs are, that they keep their vics up to the highest moral standards imaginable.

The two Pablos went home and told Scott about this disturbing confrontation. As they were discussing what to do about it, Pablo, Sr. got mad and called Scott some unflattering names, a snitch, most likely, and things like the abbreviated form of pusillanimous, and moreover casting similar and probably superfluous aspersions on Scott’s manhood, and as a result of this escalating seminar on gentlemanly honor, Pablo, Sr. and his son, Pablo, Jr. became embroiled in a dangerous situation where they now have to look over their shoulders, too.

Parenthetically, we may observe how contradictory, if not downright hypocritical, it was for Pablo. Sr. to come in and berate Scott for “not being a man about it and standing up to those guys without going to the police, you fucking pussy!” when he himself had just passed up an excellent opportunity to take charge of the situation in the Safeway parking lot.

But back to Scott’s story.

This kind of banter somehow inspired young Pablo, Jr. to attack Scott, and they tumbled and wrestled around the apartment until Junior had Scott pinned on the bed, punching him in the face, and Scott begging Junior not to hit him in the mouth and knock his new teeth out, which were not healed up yet.

At this point, Scott said, little Pablo was lightening up when big Pablo got involved, and Pablo, Sr. had no intention of giving any quarter – not after his lecture on manhood – as it would be a good time to show Junior what being a man was all about.

Rhodes: “They both knew I kept a loaded gun under my pillow and Pablo grabbed it.”

Deputy DA Elizabeth Norman: “Which one grabbed it?”

Rhodes: “Pablo Number One.”

Norman: “You mean the father?”

Rhodes: “Yeah, that’s the one. He grabbed my gun and told Pablo Two to get out of the way, then he started pistol whipping me with it.”

Norman: “You mean the defendant?”

Rhodes: “Pablo One, yes. Then Pablo Two said, ‘Dad, no. Stop!’ Shall I go on?”

Norman: “Yes! By all means.”

Rhodes: “I was bleeding from my head, and they both left my room, so when I went out I tried to dodge around the living room where they were. They saw me and I said I was going to the hospital – ‘No, I’m not going to call the cops,’ I told them, ‘I’m just going to the hospital.’ They were worried about me going to call the cops.”

Norman: “Were you afraid?”

Rhodes: “Yes. I thought they were going to kill me. Then Pablo threw me a towel because I had blood running down my face.”

Norman: “But you did call the cops, didn’t you?”

Rhodes: “At the hospital, yes, they gave me that option and I took it.”

We all learn this lesson at about age six from our precious older siblings: Would you rather be an odious old snitch or a bloody goddamn fool? Those who fail this test of character go down the moral hill in a mudslide of ever worsening capitulations until they end up in prison where they can at last hold their head up around bullies and say, “At least I ain’t no snitch.”

Rhodes didn’t go straight to the hospital. He first got on his hands and knees and “bled out,” he said, on the floor of his turbulent apartment. Then he went first to his girlfriend’s house, then to his mother’s house, then back to the apartment where he made the video of his case against the Gonzalezes, and then he finally went to the hospital and “took that option” of calling the police.

While at the apartment, Rhodes said he noticed the back door was open, and that things were missing, such the shotgun he kept under the cushions on the couch. He collected the rest of his belongings, and when he went outside the Gonzalezes were there and they asked him for the landlord’s phone number. After that, Rhodes said, he never went back to the apartment.

Defense attorney Kevin Davenport on cross: “You’ve known Pablo, Junior, and his father quite a long time, haven’t you?”

Rhodes: “Yes. A good portion of my life.”

Davenport: “And you really believed they were going to kill you?”

Rhodes: “I thought one of them would.”

Davenport: “When you said you wouldn’t call the cops, that wasn’t true was it?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “You both rented the house?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “You both paid equal rent?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “You said they [the Gonzalezes] were gathering things up and then left?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “And that cooled things down?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “And you were going to leave the house – that was your last night there?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “Did Pablo continue to live there?”

Rhodes: “I have no knowledge if they did.”

Davenport: “So you decided to make a video of your version of the incident?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “Where is it?”

Rhodes: “I’ve given a copy to law enforcement.”

Pablo, Jr,’s lawyer, Marci Baldock, leaned over and whispered to me that he had posted the video on Facebook.

Davenport: “…so you were down on your hands and knees bleeding on the floor, and you were able to observe that they were gathering stuff up?”

Rhodes: “Not yet… They were transferring things to the car and the father was watching me.”

Davenport: “So, they took all this stuff out the front door?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “How many trips did they make?”

Rhodes: “Four or five, I guess.”

Davenport: “You have to guess because you couldn’t see, right?”

Rhodes: “I could see alright.”

Davenport: “That’s when Pablo gave you the towel?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “So when you finished making your video you called your mom, then your girlfriend to come and get you?”

Rhodes: “I drove there.”

Davenport: “Then on the way to the hospital you stopped again at the house?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “For what purpose?”

Rhodes: “I wanted to make sure everything was documented. I grabbed my x-box and some other things and went to the hospital.”

Davenport: “But the first time you left, you locked the house up?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “What made you think somebody was going to come back and steal all this stuff?”

Norman: “Objection, relevance.”

Judge Richard Henderson: “Sustained.”

Davenport: “It goes to credibility, your honor. We believe the witness is fabricating evidence.”

Henderson: “The charges are felon in possession of a firearm and assault with a firearm, so the alleged thefts are irrelevant and the objection is sustained.”

Rhodes: “I figured they were in deep water so I wanted to make sure my stuff was secure before I went to the hospital.”

Henderson: “The objection was sustained, counsel.”

Judge Henderson has been retired for a few years, with a carpenter’s shop in his back yard, but he still comes by the courthouse, which is in walking distance from his house,  and he occasionally fills in for the younger judges whose busy lives and lavish salaries keep them on the go, a week at a country farm in the south of France, fly-fishing in China, bicycling through Portugal, shopping sprees at Marks & Spencer… etc.

Davenport: “When you were at the residence getting your stuff, my client was there?”

Rhodes: “Yes.”

Davenport: “Did you speak to him?”

Rhodes: “A little bit. To give him the name and number of the landlord.”

Davenport: “Ever return to the house?”

Rhodes: “Yes, the next day, or evening.”

Davenport: “Why?”

Rhodes: “To grab things.”

Davenport: “So there are discrepancies between what you told the police and what you’ve said here today…”

Rhodes: “Everything I’ve said should line up. Maybe there’s a few little discrepancies, but nothing major.”

Davenport said the defense had no evidence to present at this time, but that his client had petitioned the court to have his felonies reduced to misdemeanors and that they would submit it on that, but there was no evidence this was a loaded firearm, and so the assault should be a 245a.1 not a 245a.2.

Ms. Norman simply put the witness back on the stand and asked him if he kept the gun loaded. He said he did, and also that the defendant cocked it and pointed it at him, after striking him in the head with it. Ms. Norman also wanted a third count added, the theft of the pistol and the shotgun.

Judge Henderson added the theft of the handgun, but said there wasn’t sufficient evidence to add the theft of the shotgun. “But,” he said, “it seems to me a lot more was going on here than meets the eye with one gun under his pillow and another under the couch. However, for the purposes of a prelim, there’s sufficient evidence to hold the defendant on the 29800, the new number for felon with a gun, the 245a.2, assault with a firearm and the 487b., theft of a firearm.”

This one looks like it may go to trial because it was plain that while Davenport had cautioned his client to remain quiet and unresponsive to the testimony of the accuser, this didn’t apply to Ms. Baldock who could hardly keep from gasping and stretching her eyes at the Rhodes’ testimony — until she was called away to another courtroom.