People v. Naposki CA4/3

Good Law
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 11, 2014G047282California5,364 words

Opinion

Opinion

FACTS

Shortly after 9:00 p.m. on December 15, 1994, William McLaughlin, a divorced multimillionaire in his mid-50’s, was shot to death inside his home located in a gated Newport Beach community. McLaughlin was struck with six 9 millimeter rounds, likely fired from a 92F series Beretta handgun. Kevin McLaughlin, the victim’s adult son, who lived with him since suffering permanent injuries in an accident several years earlier, reported the shooting in a 9-1-1 call at 9:11 p.m. At the time of the murder Packard, then in her 20’s, also lived at the McLaughlin residence. McLaughlin had appointed Packard as the trustee of a trust, made her the beneficiary of a $1 million life insurance policy, and in his will he left her $150,000, a car, and the use of a beach house for a year after his death.

2 The prosecution’s theory was that Packard coaxed defendant to kill McLaughlin for her financial benefit. Its case against defendant was based on circumstantial evidence. In early 1994, Packard surreptitiously began stealing money from McLaughlin by forging his name on checks. About the same time, she became romantically involved with defendant, a former professional football player who was now…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.