Attorneys spar in case of man accused of killing pregnant girlfriend in ‘brutal domestic violence’ case

REDWOOD CITY — Attorneys sparred Monday in closing arguments over whether a man accused of killing his pregnant girlfriend should be convicted of murder or manslaughter, with the prosecution pointing to evidence that it took more than 60 seconds for him to strangle her to death, while the defense argued that his mental state and excitement to be a father precluded him from premeditation.

Andrew Coleman, 34, was charged with two counts of murder with multiple enhancements after allegedly strangling 37-year-old Kirsten Castle, killing her and his unborn child, in 2024 at the victim’s duplex in San Mateo before fleeing to Southern California with the victim’s safe containing $37,000 in his trunk. Castle’s 10-year-old daughter from a previous marriage found her mother topless and deceased on the floor of their home.

Ryan McLaughlin, a deputy district attorney for San Mateo County, implored the jury to find Coleman guilty of first degree murder for both counts on the basis that Coleman exhibited intent, premeditation and deliberation. In his arguments, he pointed to increasing tensions between the couple in the days leading up to Castle’s death and the “thousands, if not tens of thousands, of decisions Mr. Coleman made” before fatally strangling her.

McLaughlin argued that Castle, who was 5’4 and eight months pregnant, would have been no physical match for Coleman, who at the time was 5’9″, 230 pounds and a trained boxer. He maintained that Castle’s death by asphyxiation, which takes about a minute for brain death, would have required Coleman to “double down” after she went unconscious and that her physical injuries indicated that Coleman’s malice “is obvious.”

“This can only be classified as a brutal domestic violence murder,” McLaughlin said. “It’s not just intent to kill. It’s premeditated. It’s deliberate.”

Jonathan McDougall, Coleman’s defense attorney, argued that the charge should be reduced to manslaughter because Coleman was acting in response to Castle lunging at him. He also said that the jury should consider Coleman’s intoxication as a factor in his mental state due to his “ample, consistent alcohol use.” He also accused McLaughlin of speculation in his interpretation of evidence.

“The prosecution simply doesn’t know what happened,” McDougall said. “This entire case is based on intent.”

McDougall argued that Coleman was excited to become a father, pointing to his testimony to that fact on the stand and the thought that went into picking the baby’s name, Indigo. That shows, he argued, that Coleman “had no intent to kill mom while she was pregnant.”

Overseen by San Mateo County Superior Court Judge Leland Davis III, the case will now go to the jury for deliberations. They will be tasked with deciding whether to convict Coleman of first-degree murder, second-degree murder or manslaughter.

The conflict between the Coleman and Castle started building on Aug. 2, 2024, McLaughlin argued, after Castle’s baby shower when “something turned sour.” In the days before Castle’s death, she sent texts to Coleman in which she accused him of being physically abusive. In several texts, Castle told Coleman that she wanted “nothing to do with him” while he repeatedly asked for her location, he added.

“He’s becoming a tightly coiled spring,” McLaughlin said.  “The most consistent through-line in this conversation is her wanting nothing to do with him.”

McDougall aimed to contextualize the exchange with previous arguments the couple had over text, stating that they had a “dysfunctional relationship” with a pattern that alternated between “loving” aspects and hostility. Those previous conflicts, he said, never ended in violence. He pointed to the texts exchanged on one day in April 2024 in which Castle told Coleman that he was “not abusive.”

“She’d play this card to make him feel guilty,” McDougall said. “It’s a pattern.”

McLaughlin also presented a surveillance video from outside Avenue Liquors in San Mateo around 7 a.m. Aug. 4 with enhanced audio, in which he maintained that Coleman made reference to a chokehold and spoke to himself in a “call and response” in which he said, “Why you gonna choke me? Cause you’re a [expletive].”

But McDougall contested McLaughlin’s characterization of the video, maintaining that “that’s not what’s being said at all.”

Castle returned to her residence around 12:37 p.m., McLaughlin said. She was alive for at least 45 minutes after that, when her final text was sent. The coordinates of Coleman’s vehicle placed him at the residence from 12:28 p.m. until 3:27 p.m., McLaughlin said, when he then made a beeline for Southern California.

McLaughlin maintained that though Coleman was drunk, his mental acuity was intact. McDougall also referenced a vehicle stop of Coleman in West Covina that night, in which he was “acting up.” A blood draw around 1 a.m. showed his BAC at 0.28 — three times the legal limit. His level of intoxication showed, McDougall argued, that he was “not someone who in his mind was a cold-blooded killer.”

“This is not the conduct of someone who … for minutes on minutes killed the mother of his daughter,” McDougall said.