Anchorage nail salon owner arraigned for Palmer murder; bail hearing continued

PALMER — Duyvu Nguyen, the 41-year-old owner of an Anchorage nail salon, accused of driving to Palmer on Oct. 30 and shooting 32-year-old Tuan Q. Nguyen (no relation), three times in the back of the head, purportedly because his wife had told him the victim had sexually assaulted her, had his first day in court on Tuesday.

In a combined arraignment and bail hearing, more than 10 supporters of the accused were in the Palmer courthouse as Nguyen’s attorney Brooke Alowa argued to Superior Court Judge Gregory Heath that her client be released to his brother and sister-in-law as court-appointed third parties while he awaited trial for first- and second-degree murder charges.

Nguyen, who has owned L.A. Nails inside the Northway Mall since 2002, smiled and waved to his supporters sitting in the courtroom as Alowa informed Heath of her client’s intention to plead not guilty and handed him files notifying defense wishes to assert husband-wife privilege, and to file for justification of shooting due to duress.

Heath indicated Jonathan Woodman would be the judge handling the case and set a pre-trial date of Jan. 16 at 8:30 a.m. with a trial date set for the week of Jan. 16.

The accused’s brother, Trang Nguyen, and his wife, Van Nguyen, who moved into Duyvu Nguyen’s home and began helping keep his business afloat since his arrest, then testified as to why they’d be fit to be his court-appointed third parties.

The prosecuting attorney asked how often Trang Nguyen was in contact with his brother, the victim and his brother’s wife before and after the incident. Trang Nguyen said he met up with his brother’s wife after hearing the news at the mall and described her demeanor as “quiet.”

Prosecutors sought to dissuade Heath from allowing the arrangement based on the possibility that they may want to call the family members as witnesses.

When Van Nguyen testified, with the help of a remote Vietnamese translator, the concerns of the prosecutors, and the judge, turned toward the possibility of Duyvu, known as “Vu,” being a flight risk.

Heath asked Van Nguyen whether she was concerned that Vu would try to flee the state or the country, given that a guilty verdict could mean as much as 99 years in prison, and given that he still has family ties to his native Vietnam.

“I’m concerned, but I know he won’t do that because he loves his family,” Van Nguyen said, through an interpreter.

Heath then asked, “So it’s his family holding him from leaving?”

“That’s correct,” Van Nguyen said. “His children will be the incentive for him to stay.”

Alowa pointed out that her client has no prior criminal record and would be surrendering his passport as part of a third-party arrangement.

She also argued that the prosecution was merely “speculating” that family members would be called as witnesses, and that there was no reason the judge shouldn’t approve the third-party arrangement.

Heath agreed that the prosecution did not prove Trang and Van Nguyen were necessary witnesses, but had serious concerns about Vu Nguyen as a flight risk. He said the police affidavit accompanying the charges were “very compelling.”

“This is not just a serious case, it’s an extreme case,” the judge said. “However… he does not have a criminal history. He seems to have been a fine citizen, a family man and so forth. What transpired is beyond me… That will be decided by a jury.”

Heath suggested he might be open to a court-appointed third party arrangement, if the accused were to put his house up as collateral, if family members, too, were to surrender their passports, and Nguyen would be subject to a steel cuff around his ankle, equipped with GPS technology.

Heath decided to reconvene the bail hearing on Nov. 22 at 3:45 p.m.