Life of Wry

I got to be back in the fold today, and that felt good. By fold, I mean the trial of Carlos Reales Dominguez, the young man who killed David and Karim, and attempted to kill Kimberlee G.

This was the conclusion of the nine week trial — a trial that began on April 28th. I had been able to attend a lot (most days) in the first weeks, then my attendance was a bit more sporadic, then I got sick, then we left for four weeks, then the jury was in deliberations…

During a lot of that time, when I wasn’t able to attend in person, I did watch online (which, truthfully, was a better way to follow the proceedings).. even when we were in Europe. Still, in these recent weeks, I’ve felt disconnected.

But Maria came to town yesterday and we got a chance to sit for hours and talk and catch up and I was really pleased to reconnect.

And today was very significant because the jury notified the court yesterday they’d reached a verdict, and this morning their verdict was announced. Because Lauren Keene’s coverage in the Enterprise has been my go-to, and her article today is such a good summary, I’m going to post it here:

Mistrial declared after jury impasse in Davis stabbing case

By Lauren Keene, Enterprise staff writer, Jun 27, 2025

WOODLAND — A Yolo Superior Court judge declared a mistrial Friday in the Carlos Reales Dominguez homicide case after jurors, who acquitted the former UC Davis student of two counts of first-degree murder, declared themselves hopelessly deadlocked on the remaining counts.

Dominguez, 22, had faced murder and attempted murder charges in connection with the spring 2023 stabbings of David Breaux, Karim Abou Najm and Kimberlee Guillory. Only Guillory survived her attack.

The jury, after hearing five weeks of testimony, had deliberated for nine days over a three-week period before sending Judge Samuel McAdam a note Thursday afternoon saying they’d hit an impasse.

“We have reached a unanimous verdict on first-degree murder and we cannot agree on the other counts,” the foreperson of the seven-woman, five-man jury wrote.

Jurors considered lesser counts of second-degree murder and involuntary manslaughter for about a week, their last vote leaning 10-2 in favor of acquitting Dominguez for the second-degree murder of Breaux.

Attorneys in the case told The Davis Enterprise that the jury also split 9-3 to acquit Dominguez of second-degree murder for Abou Najm’s killing, and 8-4 for acquittal of Guillory’s attempted murder.

The case returns to court July 24 to determine whether the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office will pursue a new trial on the undecided charges. Dominguez remains in Yolo County Jail custody in the meantime.

McAdam called the jury into court at about 9:45 a.m. Friday to question them about their deliberations. He noted they’d heard extensive readbacks of testimony from Dominguez as well as three mental-health experts who concluded his untreated schizophrenia put him in a state of active psychosis during the stabbings that altered his perception of reality.

“It’s very diligent, hard work that this jury has done, so I’m mindful of that,” McAdam said. He asked whether they would benefit from any further instructions or deliberations, declaring the mistrial when they said would not.

“You all should be very proud of your service,” McAdam said as he dismissed the panel.

Not everyone agreed, however.

“Today is stab number 53,” Nadine Yehya, Abou Najm’s mother, said as she left the courtroom, alluding to the 52 stab wounds her son endured when Dominguez attacked him.

His father, Majdi Abou Najm, told reporters he dreads the thought of sitting through a second trial in the case.

“It was a nightmare, and the idea that we have to pass through it again is unbearable,” he said.

Breaux’s sister, Maria Breaux, said she was “grateful for the jury and continuing to hold compassion for everyone involved.

“Although it’s taking longer than expected, justice is playing out the way it’s supposed to, which means due process — hearing facts, weighing evidence and making informed decisions,” she said.

The jurors met with prosecutor Matthew De Moura and defense attorney Dan Hutchinson behind closed doors for more than an hour after being dismissed. They declined to comment to news reporters as they left the courthouse.

Reasonable doubt

From the trial’s start, no one disputed that Dominguez committed the stabbings of “Compassion Guy” Breaux in Central Park, UCD student Abou Najm in Sycamore Park and unhoused woman Guillory at an L Street encampment during late April and early May of 2023.

With both sides also concurring that Dominguez suffered from schizophrenia at the time, that left the jury to decide his state of mind during the attacks — whether they were premeditated, and he understood his actions were legally and morally wrong.

Prosecutors alleged that Dominguez acted out in “intense anger” over his personal struggles, including his recent expulsion from UCD due to failing grades. They said he still pined for his former girlfriend, who spurned his invitation to “hang out” a week before the stabbings began.

They also asserted that Dominguez displayed consciousness of guilt when he fled the three crime scenes and, when first contacted by police, took measures to hide the bloodstained hunting knife he carried inside a shopping bag.

“You can be schizophrenic and still act consciously, form intent, commit crimes and murder people with premeditation,” De Moura said during the trial’s closing arguments earlier this month. “It’s not one or the other.”

The defense case focused on Dominguez’s mental-health decline in the nearly two years that preceded the stabbings, during which he gradually withdrew from family and friends, ignored his personal hygiene and experienced both hallucinations and delusions.

Testifying in his own defense during the trial’s final days, Dominguez said he believed he had attacked shape-shifting “shadow figures” that had haunted him for months. Only after receiving psychiatric treatment, he said, did he realize his actions had harmed human beings.

“This is a young man who was sick, and what is sad that he’d been sick for two years and nobody did anything to help him,” Hutchinson said in his closing argument, noting the lack of a motive for the stabbings. Prosecutors “want you to believe that for no reason, he turned into a cold-hearted killer because he was angry. Where’s the evidence of that?”

Dominguez had pleaded not guilty and not guilty by reason of insanity. A conviction in the trial’s guilt phase would have moved the case to a sanity phase to determine the state-of-mind issue.

Had Dominguez been found legally sane, he faced a state prison sentence of life without the possibility of parole. An insanity finding would have resulted in his committal to a state psychiatric facility.

The defense, which carries the burden in proving insanity, was expected to again call as witnesses the three mental-health experts — two court-appointed and one defense-retained — all of whom concluded Dominguez was legally insane at the time of his crimes.

John E.B. Myers, a Davis resident and criminal law professor at UC Law San Francisco, said it’s likely the DA’s Office will retry the case. He wasn’t surprised by Friday’s outcome.

“The system worked the way it was supposed to work,” Myers said. The jury’s impasse “tells me that they had very good lawyering on both sides. And it was clearly a careful, conscientious jury, that they took this much time.”

In light of the apparent struggle over Dominguez’s intent, Myers questioned prosecutors’ decision not to present their own mental-health expert during the trial’s guilt phase. He surmised they risked bolstering the defense case had a fourth expert reached the same conclusion.

“So the expert testimony was completely one-sided,” Myers said. “How can that not raise a reasonable doubt?”

The photo above was taken immediately after Judge McAdam (Sam to Jim and me, ever since Peter and Sam’s son Jack played travel ball together on Crush, a team Sam formed following the boys’ final year of Little League all star tournaments and needed a place to further develop their skills) thanked, praised and released the jury and adjourned the trial. Upon our exit, Maria was approached by the media (like in the early days) for comments.