Closing Arguments Delivered By Defense In Larry Millete Murder Trial

CHULA VISTA, CA — A Chula Vista man accused of killing his wife, who vanished without a trace more than five years ago, is incapable of pulling off "the perfect murder," one of his defense attorneys told jurors Wednesday.

Larry Millete, 44, is charged with murdering his wife of 20 years, May "Maya" Millete, who has not been seen or heard from since Jan. 7, 2021. Her body has never been found, but police and prosecutors say there is no evidence to suggest she was alive after that date.

Subscribe

Prosecutors allege Larry killed his wife in their home because she sought a divorce, then loaded her body into an SUV and disposed of her on Jan. 8, during a time period of about 12 hours in which his whereabouts remain unknown.

Liann Sabatini, one of Larry's attorneys, told jurors during her closing argument Wednesday morning that the prosecution had not proven Larry murdered his wife or that a murder happened at all.

Sabatini cited statements from Deputy District Attorney Christy Bowles' closing arguments on Tuesday, in which the prosecutor said, "I can't tell you what happened inside that house. I can't tell you exactly how he did it."

The defense attorney argued jurors were being asked to speculate rather than rely on facts in a case that lacked a body, crime scene, murder weapon, or eyewitnesses.

She argued a number of investigative methods utilized to try to prove Larry's involvement in May's disappearance were flawed and conducted with the predetermined conclusion that Larry was guilty. Those included a district attorney's investigator's analysis of how many miles the family's Lexus SUV must have traveled on Jan. 8 and a cellphone analysis that prosecutors said showed May's phone never left the family's residence, both of which Sabatini said involved numerous assumptions and "leaps" in logic.

Given the circumstantial nature of the case, much of the trial evidence centered on Larry Millete's alleged motive for killing May, which the prosecution said was gleaned through his text messages and emails with family members and "spell casters" he believed could magically influence May to give up her plans for divorce.

Sabatini argued the expansive digital trail Larry left behind regarding his anguish over his crumbling marriage showed he was too "messy" to commit a murder "so clinically."

She also asked jurors to look at the context surrounding his behavior, which prosecutors characterized throughout the trial as possessive and controlling of May.

Larry suspected May was cheating, but she continually denied any infidelity, Sabatini said.

But an affair was occurring, and May was denying it to her family and friends while portraying Larry as "crazy" for suspecting it, the attorney said.

Sabatini said Larry was made out to be "the villain" and was left alienated, which may have caused him to turn to spell casters on the internet for support and as an outlet for his marital issues.

She said the behavior that was being classified as stalking was Larry conducting a "tragic investigation" in which he was trying to confirm whether May was cheating.

While she said jurors might not agree with how Larry handled the situation, Sabatini said, "There is no playbook for heartbreak."

She argued Larry's sadness over the state of his marriage was also the impetus behind a series of internet searches he made for poison hemlock, a plant that Bowles suggested Larry may have used to poison May. Sabatini said instead that Larry sought the plant to commit suicide and she noted Larry made several other searches for various painless forms of death.

The defense attorney conceded Larry's requests to spell casters were odd, but she noted none of the spell requests sought for May to die and likened the communications to sharing intrusive thoughts with the only people who were validating his experiences.

She also argued there was no direct evidence of Larry ever physically abusing or financially controlling May, nor did Larry exert control over his wife as the prosecution claimed, as May was able to carry on an affair for a year without Larry being able to stop it.

In her rebuttal argument, Bowles argued the only reasonable conclusion was that Larry murdered May, as he was the only person who wished her harm, the only one with a motive, and the only person who could not be found on Jan. 8.

"You would have to believe a long series of coincidences to believe the defendant is not guilty of this crime," the prosecutor said.

While Sabatini argued Larry stopped making spell requests after Jan. 7 because he likely accepted his marriage was ending, Bowles said nothing suggested he would ever do that and that it represented an abrupt change in his behavior.

On Tuesday, Bowles told jurors Larry's spell requests suddenly shifted away from May and onto her affair partner, because "There's no more issue with May. That has been handled."

Surveillance footage captured May entering the family's home at around 4:45 p.m. Jan. 7, but no video footage has captured her leaving.

According to trial testimony, her last known contact with anyone was in a text message with one of her sisters at around 8:15 p.m. Jan. 7, then her cell phone terminated all cellular connections at about 1:25 a.m. Jan. 8.

Larry -- whose phone also terminated cell connections on the morning of Jan. 8 -- allegedly left the family's home in an SUV at about 6:45 a.m. and did not return until about 6 p.m. that evening.

Larry Millete faces up to 25 years to life in state prison if convicted of May's murder.

By JASON KUROSU / City News Service