Sacto 9-1-1

By Andy Furillo
afurillo@sacbee.com

Chu Vue testified today that it was his daughter who first told him that Steve Lo had been shot and killed, but that he had no idea at the time who might have done it.

Deputy District Attorney Eric Kindall, in his second day of cross-examination, expressed incredulity that Vue didn't know who had done it, in that he had spoken to his brothers in the preceding weeks and that one of them had told him they wanted to "jack" Lo up.

"If I knew who it was them who did the killing, I wouldn't be sitting here right now," Vue testified.

Vue, 45, a fired former Sacramento sheriff's deputy, is accused of murder on charges that he arranged Lo's slaying because the victim was having an affair with Vue's wife.

He testified his daughter woke him up at noon the day of the Oct. 15, 2008, shooting of Lo to tell him that she had spoken to her mother and "she said something about mom's boyfriend being killed."

The questioning came as Kindall continued his relentless cross-examination, wearing Vue down with literally hundreds of questions the past two days about the timing of his phone calls and the contents of the conversations he had with his on-the-lam brothers in the month leading up to the shooting death of Lo, a state correctional officer.

Vue seemed to grow tired as the morning wore on, his voice dropping several decibel levels.

He was at a loss to explain his dozens of calls to his younger brothers Chong and Gary Vue.

In one conversation, Kindall noted that Vue was calling one of his brothers at 6:51 p.m. on Sept. 21, 2008, at the same time his car was seen driving past Lo's south Sacramento house. It was a little more than three weeks before Lo was gunned down in his garage while he was going to work.

"I don't know," Vue answered, when asked what they were talking about. "I don't recall why I'm making that phone call."'

Vue had testified he was looking for his wife. Prosecutors say it was her affair with Lo that motivated Vue to have the 39-year-old victim killed. The younger brothers are accused of carrying out the fatal shooting attack.

Asked if he was angry while he was looking for his wife, Vue replied, "I'd say I was angry, yes."

Later that same evening, Chong Vue's cell phone pinged off the transmission tower closest to Chu Vue's house, but the former deputy denied that the brothers ever stayed at his residence or that he ever saw them there after Minnesota authorities swore out a warrant for their arrest for a 2001 murder in Minneapolis. They were later convicted in that case.

An hour after Chong Vue's phone pinged off the tower closest to his brother's house, it pinged again off the tower closest to Steve Lo's house.

Lo was shot and killed Oct. 15, 2008. Chong Vue and Gary Vue are scheduled to be tried for Lo's murder next year.

Some of Kindall's pointed questions contained what police and prosecutors believe are the answers to the events that led up to Lo's killing.

When Vue could not explain why his cell phone pinged off the tower near Lo's home three times on Sept. 27, 2008. Kindall asked, "It certainly had nothing to do with your conducting a surveillance on Steve Lo's home?"

"No," Vue replied.

Kindall noted that on Sept. 28, 2008, Vue was running a trace on a number he retrieved from his wife's cell phone, some three weeks after he said he had come to terms with the fact their marriage was through.

"Why are you still snooping on her on the 28th of September, Mr. Vue?" Kindall asked.

"I don't think it was snooping," Vue replied. "I was curious."

"Curious or obsessed, Mr. Vue?" Kindall asked.

Judge Steve White sustained defense attorney Donald Masuda's objection to Kindall's question.

The cross-examination continues this afternoon in Sacramento Superior Court.

Call The Bee's Andy Furillo, (916) 321-1141.

KCRA: Former deputy cries during testimony

Previous coverage:

Prosecutor grills Chu Vue on events preceding slaying - Sept. 14, 2010

Chu Vue testifies calls were innocent on day of Sacramento slaying - Sept. 10, 2010

Chu Vue testifies calls were innocent on day of Sacramento slaying - Sept. 9, 2010

Defendant Chu Vue takes stand in murder trial - Sept. 8, 2010

Sex life of murder suspect's wife will be aired at Vue trial - Sept. 3, 2010

'Other' defendant in Chu Vue murder case testifies, denies role in killing - Sept. 2, 2010

Prosecution calls its wrap-up witness in Chu Vue murder trial - Sept. 1, 2010

Cell phone tracking shows suspects near officer's killing - Aug. 24, 2010

Sister says Sacramento suspect knew who wife's lover was - Aug. 20, 2010

Sacramento murder trial told where two suspects were housed - Aug. 19, 2010

Chu Vue's cousin testifies about fugitives' visit at time of slaying - Aug. 18, 2010

Former deputy sought data on slain man, trial is told - Aug. 17, 2010

Victim's daughter disputes defense's breakup claim - Aug. 13, 2010

Co-worker says he warned slaying victim to 'watch out for woman's husband - Aug. 12, 2010

Shooting victim's wife provides emotional testimony during Vue trial - Aug. 11, 2010

Younger brother blamed as Sacramento murder trial begins - Aug. 10, 2010

Judge unseals some documents in ex-deputy's murder case - June 10, 2010

Killer expected to testify against brother in Sacramento murder trial - June 3, 2010

Death penalty won't be sought in slaying of California correctional officer - March 14, 2010

Defendant's sister convicted as accessory in California correctional officer's killing - Feb. 23, 2010

Sacramento County DA won't seek death penalty in guard's killing - Jan. 15, 2010

Suspect in California prison guard's killing is convicted of Minnesota murder - Dec. 12, 2009

Death penalty ruled out in ex-Sacramento deputy's murder trial - Nov. 21, 2009

About Comments

Reader comments on Sacbee.com are the opinions of the writer, not The Sacramento Bee. If you see an objectionable comment, click the "report abuse" button below it. We will delete comments containing inappropriate links, obscenities, hate speech, and personal attacks. Flagrant or repeat violators will be banned. See more about comments here.

What You Should Know About Comments on Sacbee.com

Sacbee.com is happy to provide a forum for reader interaction, discussion, feedback and reaction to our stories. However, we reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments or ban users who can't play nice. (See our full terms of service here.)

Here are some rules of the road:

• Keep your comments civil. Don't insult one another or the subjects of our articles. If you think a comment violates our guidelines click the "report abuse" button to notify the moderators. Responding to the comment will only encourage bad behavior.

• Don't use profanities, vulgarities or hate speech. This is a general interest news site. Sometimes, there are children present. Don't say anything in a way you wouldn't want your own child to hear.

• Do not attack other users; focus your comments on issues, not individuals.

• Stay on topic. Only post comments relevant to the article at hand. If you want to discuss an issue with a specific user, click on his profile name and send him a direct message.

• Do not copy and paste outside material into the comment box.

• Don't repeat the same comment over and over. We heard you the first time.

• Do not use the commenting system for advertising. That's spam and it isn't allowed.

• Don't use all capital letters. That's akin to yelling and not appreciated by the audience.

You should also know that The Sacramento Bee does not screen comments before they are posted. You are more likely to see inappropriate comments before our staff does, so we ask that you click the "report abuse" button to submit those comments for moderator review. You also may notify us via email at feedback@sacbee.com. Note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us the profile name of the user who made the comment. Remember, comment moderation is subjective. You may find some material objectionable that we won't and vice versa.

If you submit a comment, the user name of your account will appear along with it. Users cannot remove their own comments once they have submitted them, but you may ask our staff to retract one of your comments by sending an email to feedback@sacbee.com. Again, make sure you note the headline on which the comment is made and tell us your profile name.

hide comments
blog comments powered by Disqus


About Sacto 9-1-1

Sacto 9-1-1 is a blog on crime and emergency services news in the Sacramento region.

Send feedback on Sacto 9-1-1 to Assistant Metro Editor Anthony Sorci at asorci@sacbee.com

Subscribe to Breaking News Alerts

FOLLOW US | Get more from sacbee.com | Follow us on Twitter | Become a fan on Facebook | Get news in your inbox | View our mobile versions | e-edition: Print edition online | What our bloggers are saying

Sacto 9-1-1 Q&A

Q: What happened with the case regarding Marc McCormick? He was accused of videotaping a woman in her home and was arrested. He lives in my neighborhood and I see him all the time. Were charges dropped?


A: According to Sacramento Superior Court online records, misdemeanor charges have been filed against Mark William McCormick, alleging that he used a camcorder or other instrument to view an individual in a place where there was an expectation of privacy, trespassing and peeping.

His next court date is June 4.

According to Sacramento police logs, McCormick, 40, was arrested March 8 after the victim reported that a friend had entered her home without her knowledge to secretly videotape her.


715 questions answered | Submit a question

May 2012

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
    1 2 3 4 5
6 7 8 9 10 11 12
13 14 15 16 17 18 19
20 21 22 23 24 25 26
27 28 29 30 31    

Monthly Archives


Kim Minugh on Twitter

Follow "Kim_Minugh" on Twitter

Local Agencies on Twitter

Categories