‘Hate Crime’ Case Will Go to Trial

Pair accused in 2005 beating of pregnant woman in parking
lot
San Martin – The case against two Morgan Hill residents accused of assaulting a pregnant woman while uttering racist remarks last summer will go to trial, Superior Court Judge Susan Bernardini ruled Friday. 

“This went way too far,” Bernardini said. “I think there is sufficient evidence …”

Her decision was the result of a lengthy two-day preliminary hearing where Bernardini heard evidence against the two defendants – both of whom have entered not guilty pleas.

Charles Peralta, 29, and Nicole Agriesti, 21, face charges of assault causing bodily injury with a hate crime enhancement. The enhancement could add as many as three years to a prison sentence if Agriesti and Peralta are convicted. The assault charge carries a maximum penalty of four years and a fine up to $10,000.

The alleged assault took place July 21, 2005. According to Morgan Hill Police, Xochitl Marina Calderon, 32, was assaulted by the pair after they ran over a bag of groceries she left in the parking lot of the Cochrane Village Apartments. Calderon said the pair repeatedly hit her and kicked her, even as she told them she was two months pregnant. 

She was hospitalized immediately after the incident, released within eight hours, then had to return again a day later because of heavy bleeding. After the assault, doctors feared the trauma would cause the loss of her child.

The child, a daughter, was born prematurely at the end of the year after 26 weeks of pregnancy and weighed 2 pounds, Calderon testified during the trial.

Agriesti’s defense attorney Mark Arnold argued that the assault did not cause the problems, that her doctor had already called it a “high-risk” pregnancy. 

Calderon testified that her doctor had told her she might have to undergo a Cesarean section, but that it was not a high-risk pregnancy.

Much of Calderon’s time on the stand Thursday and Friday was spent reliving the assault blow-by-blow. 

“Mrs. Calderon is exaggerating her claim, no question about it,” Bernardini said as she made her ruling. “It is clear to me if the punches and blows were as she states she would have sustained far more serious injury.”

Calderon apparently became confused during hours of cross-examination about the number of blows which struck her body and where they struck her and the order of the punches and kicks.

“She’s getting beat up, trying to protect her fetus, and she’s lying because she doesn’t remember where this blow fell or which was first,” Deputy District Attorney Mark Hood said in defense of the alleged victim during his closing argument.

Arnold described Calderon as the least credible witness he has seen in his many years as an attorney, said she was lying under oath and said that at best she had a faulty memory. Arnold contended it was Calderon who actually initiated the attack because she was angry the defendants had driven over a bag of her groceries. 

“There’s no question she was injured and taken to the hospital, but she’s responsible for those actions,” he said. “Based on her testimony, without question she perjured herself.”

Bernardini said even if the incident began as “mutual combat,” eye-witness testimony by Brandy Ritters proves that Calderon became the victim as she tried to retreat.

Hood said it was unreasonable to expect Calderon to remember every detail of the assault eight months later, especially after the distress of the incident and the possibility of losing her unborn child.

According to Calderon’s testimony and the police report, after the defendants ran over her groceries, Calderon asked them to pay for them. She said Peralta threw a penny at her and called her a “wetback.” She said the two repeated the derogatory term and used profanity. 

Bernardini said the hate crime enhancement would stand because several witnesses testified to hearing Peralta and Agriesti use racial slurs. 

Peralta and Agriesti will be arraigned April 3.