A series of investigative articles by veteran journalist Cece Woods of The Current Report is challenging the integrity of the prosecution that led to Rebecca Grossman's murder conviction for the 2020 traffic collision that killed two children. The reporting raises fundamental questions about how the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office and Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department handled evidence, investigation, and the narrative in this high-profile case.
Woods has published 15 articles identifying critical issues with missing and suppressed evidence, procedural fairness, selective prosecution, and the role of media and politics in a case tried as murder rather than a tragic traffic accident. The series documents how prosecutors delayed filing charges against Grossman until December 29, 2020, three months after the accident and weeks after District Attorney George Gascón took office, raising concerns about political timing.
Key questions center on potentially exculpatory evidence that was allegedly bypassed or excluded. The reporting reveals that prosecutors did not fully present testimony suggesting former major-league baseball pitcher Scott Erickson was driving a vehicle ahead of Grossman that night. Investigators never conducted DNA testing on the front bumper of Grossman's car, which might have determined whether both children were struck by her vehicle or Erickson's.
Physical evidence discrepancies further complicate the case. Critical pieces including a fog light cover and license plate frame that did not match Grossman's Mercedes were documented as missing from the crash-site evidence chain, despite pointing to another vehicle's involvement. Prosecutors also changed legal theories between proceedings, denying racing in Erickson's misdemeanor hearing while invoking a racing narrative in Grossman's trial without full disclosure to the jury.
The Current Report has obtained internal records, depositions, and coroner's documents revealing what the publication describes as concealed misconduct. These findings have prompted calls for independent review of the Grossman investigation and prosecution by oversight bodies, including LA County's inspector-general or a court-appointed special master, to assess whether due-process safeguards were met.
The implications extend beyond Grossman's case to public trust in how justice is administered in high-profile matters. The series urges public release of relevant internal records, investigative files, missing evidence logs, and prosecutorial decisions to allow further scrutiny. Open hearings could determine why key evidence disappeared, why certain witnesses and testimony were omitted or changed, and how investigator fitness and credibility were evaluated.
For business and technology leaders monitoring legal and regulatory environments, this case demonstrates how investigative journalism can challenge institutional narratives and demand accountability. The questions raised about evidence handling and procedural fairness have broader implications for corporate legal strategies, risk assessment, and public confidence in justice systems that intersect with business operations. As digital platforms like https://thecurrentreport.com enable deeper investigative work, organizations must prepare for increased scrutiny of their interactions with legal systems and government agencies.
