Erik Denton, the father of three young children who were killed in Reseda on April 10, 2021, is asking a judge to force a psychologist to turn over her session notes and written report about the children’s mother. His legal team argues those files sit at the heart of a civil case that accuses city and county agencies of missing repeated warning signs. The motion was filed ahead of a July 10, 2026 hearing in Pasadena Superior Court.
Motion puts spotlight on evaluator’s files
In court papers filed this week, Denton’s attorneys ask Judge Jared D. Moses to order psychologist Nichole M. Vienna to produce her report and any related records from evaluations she performed in the criminal case, according to MyNewsLA. The filings say Vienna declined to comply with a subpoena, arguing the materials contain sensitive information, and note that another psychiatrist, Dr. David S. Rad, summarized Vienna’s conclusions in a related report. Denton’s lawyers say Vienna’s own records are crucial to their claim that city and county officials failed to act despite multiple red flags.
Insanity ruling frames both criminal and civil cases
In the criminal proceedings, a judge found that Liliana Carrillo was legally insane at the time of the killings, relying on reports from three examiners. That ruling and the underlying case file have been widely covered, including by the Los Angeles Times. The insanity finding has helped define what each side can seek or challenge as they fight over evidence in both the criminal and civil arenas.
Civil suit packed with discovery skirmishes
Denton filed his civil complaint against the City and County of Los Angeles in April 2022, and the docket shows a steady stream of disputes over what records must be turned over and how the complaint can be amended, according to court-ruling reporting on Trellis. Recent filings seek both the evaluator’s notes and personnel or training files for officers who responded to earlier calls about Carrillo’s mental health. Tentative rulings cited in the record indicate the case is still deep in discovery, with trial dates set later this year.
Therapy records are protected, but not off limits
Under California law, confidential exchanges between a patient and a psychotherapist are generally privileged. That protection comes with narrow exceptions and rules about waiver under state evidence law, including Evidence Code §1014. Judges can conduct an in‑camera review, a private inspection of records, to decide whether any portion is relevant and discoverable while keeping unrelated material sealed. Those procedures are likely to drive the outcome of the fight over Vienna’s files, and to determine how much, if anything, leaves her office and makes it into open court.
Jailhouse interview still looms large
From jail, Carrillo told a reporter that she “drowned them” and framed the killings as a way to protect the children from alleged abuse. Regional outlets including ABC7 reported those remarks from the KGET interview. Denton has pointed to that interview and other public statements as evidence that his children were in danger. His attorneys argue those on-the-record comments undercut the idea that everything the court-appointed examiner wrote down must stay completely confidential.
Why Denton is pressing for the file
Denton’s lawyers say Vienna’s report and testing results, which they contend were already shared in the criminal case, are key to mapping the timing and severity of Carrillo’s symptoms and to assessing whether government workers missed actionable warning signs. According to the civil filings, Vienna refused to turn over records after being subpoenaed, again citing the sensitive nature of the material. Denton’s team is asking the court either to order targeted disclosure or to review the records in camera and release only the portions tied directly to their negligence claims.
What the July 10 hearing could decide
If the judge orders limited disclosure of Vienna’s records, Denton’s attorneys say it could bolster allegations that police and social workers failed to connect the dots before the children were killed. If the court confines access to an in‑camera review, the public may never see what the files contain, even as the judge decides what each side can use at trial. Either way, the July 10 hearing is set to shape the trajectory of the civil case and could ripple into local debates over cross‑reporting and mental‑health follow‑up in child welfare investigations.
