An Orange County Superior Court judge has denied a petition to overturn a conviction of a defendant in the so-called Honor Roll Murder case from 1992 based on a new law.
Kirn Young Kim was convicted in July 1994 of murder in the beating death of 17-year-old Stuart Tay on New Year’s Eve 1992 in Buena Park. Kim was the purported lookout for the killing and has since been paroled.
Tay became the target of five teens who thought he intended to turn them in for a planned heist of computer equipment. The killing made headlines as the defendants were high school scholars and the film “Better Luck Tomorrow” was loosely based on the case.
Orange County Superior Court Judge Gary Paer ruled Thursday that prosecutors proved that Kim could still be convicted of murder under current law and is not eligible for a new sentence.
“There is overwhelming direct and circumstantial evidence to show (Kim) directly aided and abetted an express malice murder…” Paer wrote.
Co-defendant Robert Chan orchestrated the killing after he got into a dispute with Tay over their plan to rob a computer salesman in Anaheim. Chan recruited co-defendants Abraham Acosta, Mun Kang, Charles Choe and Kim, prosecutors said.
The killers lured Tay to the backyard of Acosta’s home with Kim acting as a lookout. The killers rehearsed the beating and dug a shallow grave, prosecutors said.
“Witness Choe testified that on Dec. 31, 1992, he was at Chan’s house along with defendant and Kang when Chan told them he was going to kill Tay and laid out the plan to accomplish the murder,” Paer wrote. “He even discussed some of the specifics of the plan.
“(Kim) testified that Chan had a plan to burglarize a computer business and Stuart Tay was supposed to be involved. Chan was upset with Tay because Tay used a false name, and Chan did not trust him. Additionally, Tay was delaying the burglary plan.
“(Kim) testified they headed to the murder site, Acosta’s garage, and they stopped at a store and Chan bought latex gloves for everyone to wear. Choe drove his car with Kang and (Kim) drove his car with Chan. At the (order to show cause) hearing, (Kim) admits he heard Chan saying he wanted to kill Martin, aka Tay, at Acosta’s house.”
Kim also testified he “dug one shovel full of dirt the day before,” Paer wrote.
Kim testified at the hearings last month that the “hole was for a dog, but he never mentioned the hole was for a dog to (probation officer Louise) Pritchard back in 1994,” the judge wrote.
Kim testified in last month’s hearings that he drifted in and out of the conversations about killing Tay, Paer said. But Kim did not attempt to stop one of the cohorts from spraying a product into his hair to lighten it, the judge noted.
“He continued his involvement for the next several hours in disguise,” Paer said.
The perpetrators even manipulated it so Tay’s car would be left elsewhere so it wouldn’t be seen at the crime scene, Paer said.
Kim “was to make sure nobody followed them to Acosta’s house,” Paer said.
“After they murdered Tay in the garage” with a baseball bat and sledgehammer, “Chan came outside the garage and gave (Kim) Tay’s car keys,” Paer said.
“Chan told (Kim) to go back to his house and get Tay’s car and then meet the rest of them at Albertson’s parking lot,” Paer said.
Kim did as he was told and later abandoned Tay’s car in Compton because the killers believed local residents would strip it down.
Kim “wore latex gloves so he would not leave fingerprints and took off his shoes so he wouldn’t leave shoe prints,” the judge wrote.
“These acts to suppress evidence clearly show a consciousness of guilt,” Paer wrote.
Chan took $20 from Tay’s wallet and gave it to Kim, Paer said.
The judge noted that Kim told probation officer Louise Pritchard he accepted the verdict because he “knew something was going to happen” and that he wished he had something to stop Chan, the judge said.
Paer also pointed to Kim’s taking responsibility for his role in the plot when he was up for parole.
Kim looked up to Chan, who was a successful academic scholar, Paer noted. Kim told a doctor in 1993 that Chan “was more like my boss, and I was his `henchman,’ ” Paer noted.
Kim “even took two separate SAT exams for two students at Chan’s request,” Paer said, adding he was paid $100 each time.
Kim “was already a crime partner with Chan before Tay’s murder and committed substantial crimes at the request of Chan,” Paer said.
Under previous state law any defendant who participated in a murder would be found culpable, but new state law requires more involvement in the actual crime. Paer concluded that Kim could still be convicted of murder even if he thought Tay was meant to just be beaten with a bat because he knew it was dangerous and potentially deadly.
Kim knew the attack included weapons, did nothing to help the beaten victim or called authorities, Paer said. He did nothing to stop the attack, knew the plan was to kill Tay and even took money afterward, the judge said.
Kim testified he didn’t think Chan would follow through with killing Tay, but Paer said that was “unbelievable given the overwhelming…”
Paer also brushed aside expert testimony about brain development in adolescents, noting that the killers were “high achievers in high school and were headed towards attending prestigious colleges based on their academic performance.”
The judge added, “It can be said that every 10th grader in high school knows what a grave is for and that attacking someone from behind with a bat is inherently dangerous and life threatening.”
Paer also rejected any possibility of “peer pressure,” remarking that it was “the opposite — he wanted to be in Chan’s graces, be his friend and desired his companionship with a `tough’ guy.’ ”
Paer also said Kim did not suffer from a traumatic or violent upbringing.
“There is no evidence that (Kim) was psychotic or suffering any major mental disorder,” Paer said.