Questions are resurfacing in an elder abuse case that was once closed. The District Attorney’s Office says they never received video evidence, but the victim’s family claims it was always included in the original report. Now I’m reaching out to the Kern County Sheriff’s Office to find out what was actually submitted.
A few weeks ago, I reported on an elder abuse case that was dismissed due to lack of evidence.
But the victim’s family says they submitted more than 40 videos with their initial report. After that story aired, the District Attorney’s Office reopened the case.
They also sent me this statement at the time. "The District Attorney’s Office has spoken with the victim’s family, who informed us that dozens of videos were submitted to the Kern County Sheriff’s Office. The videos were not referenced in the report nor submitted as evidence to our office. The statement I provided is accurate based on the evidence available to us at the time of our review. Our next step will be to examine the additional evidence that is expected to be presented." DA's office.
I contacted the Kern County Sheriff’s Office last Friday to confirm whether the videos were included in the original report. They told me that when the case was first submitted to the DA, they had not received any video evidence from the family. Now that those files have been received, the case is being reviewed.
Still, the victim’s daughter, Windy Duenas, says the videos were submitted from the beginning — and she has confirmation. "I am absolutely certain that those were uploaded and that they received them. There was confirmation not only from my sister, but also from myself." Duenas said.
Windy says her family filed the initial report on June 12.
According to her, the online system used for reporting allows up to 24 files to be uploaded at once.
She says she uploaded:
- 24 videos on July 1 at 9:38 p.m.
- Another 24 on July 2 at 7:48 a.m.
- And 21 photos and screenshots shortly after that
The Kern County Sheriff’s Office confirmed this timeline:
- June 30: The case was submitted to the DA with photo and video evidence received on June 12 and 13
- July 1: Supplemental files from the family were uploaded
- July 9: The DA’s office rejected the case at 1:26 p.m.
- July 10: The DA made an emergency request for body-worn camera footage
While the District Attorney’s Office and the Sheriff’s Office offer different accounts, one question remains:
Was crucial evidence overlooked? The case remains reopened for now, but Windy says she’s still hoping for justice for her mother.
Stay in Touch with Us Anytime, Anywhere:
