Judge orders Merced homicide defendant to trial. But are witnesses reliable?

A Merced County judge on Tuesday ordered San Jose resident Jerome Slayton to stand trial in connection with the slaying in 2008 of 29-year-old Michael Riley.

But during Slayton’s preliminary hearing, his attorney poked at the credibility of several witnesses, including the former lead investigator of the case.

Slayton has pleaded not guilty to premeditated murder charges in connection with Riley’s death on Oct. 7, 2008, in the 1100 block of Loughborough Drive. Authorities believe Slayton shot Riley three times.

Several law enforcement investigators were called to the stand to testify Tuesday, including former Merced Police Detective Joe Deliman, who led the investigation for most of the last 10 years.

On the witness stand, Deliman answered “yes” when asked if he had taken money from the Merced Police Officers Association for personal use, the first time he has publicly acknowledged the allegations since the probe first came to light nearly a year ago.

Slayton’s attorney, Merced County Deputy Public Defender Ramnik Samrao, also questioned Deliman about confidential witnesses he spoke with during his investigation of Riley’s death.

Samrao questioned the credibility of multiple witnesses in the case, noting criminal histories and gang involvement and questioned why some of their statements had changed over time.

Detective Jeff Horn, the current lead investigator on the case, also was questioned by Samrao. Horn said he interviewed a witness who served jail time with Slayton. The witness told Horn that Slayton had confessed the slaying while in custody, Horn said.

Samrao also criticized some video evidence in the case, questioning whether the evidence had been manipulated.

Merced County Judge Donald Shaver ruled there was sufficient circumstantial evidence Slayton killed Riley.

Samrao said Tuesday’s hearing was productive.

“We had a lot of good things come out of it,” Samrao said. “Jerome Slayton’s name never came up until 2010 when (a confidential witness) was looking at life in prison on three different cases, you know, and says he wants to get probation for his cases so he gives our guy’s name.”

Samrao also said there was no physical evidence in the case, including the absence of the murder weapon.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Rob Carroll acknowledged there were issues with some of the witnesses in the case, as there are in cases involving gangs and criminal histories. But he noted their credibility is up to a jury.

“We take the witnesses as we find them,” Carroll said. “This is not a stage production. We have to deal with whatever problems the witnesses have. ... but we’re going to do the best we can for (Riley’s family).”