About My Case

Names and identifying information removed

Equal protection under the law is what the United States Justice System stands for but in this case it did not occur. This is what the National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial Fund says.

Deputy [redacted] was shot and killed when he and his brother, a New Mexico State Patrolman, assisted a restaurant owner in breaking up a fight between two women. Deputy [redacted] and Patrolman [redacted] identified themselves as officers to the restaurant owner when the fight broke out. After escorting the two female suspects outside, an unknown gunman opened fire on both officers. Deputy [redacted] was fatally shot more than seven times. His brother was shot in the hip and suffered non-life threatening injuries. The suspect was found guilty of first-degree murder and attempted murder.

This narrative is from a national website dedicated to officers who died in the line of duty.  Most news sources reported this story about my case.

Here’s what I have to say:

[Click on highlighted text to see reference material]

I killed someone in self defense and take full responsibility. I claim innocence because I was in the commission of no crime and my actions were taken to protect someone. A group of drunk, fight trained, off duty cops attacked my best friend. There was no justification for them to do this. There’s no disputing the fact that they were drunk based on the location, their own admittance, bar tabs, and Blood Alcohol Content reports.

We all feared the worst. The unidentified suspects held our friend down and he was being strangled. His blood covered the white car he was pinned on top of. I was right there trying to help but I couldn’t get around their unidentified accomplices.

One of their accomplices threw me to the ground by my neck. He later testified as a star witness for the prosecution. He described this fight but characterized it differently. He tried to put me in a choke hold but I got out. I needed help getting to my friend. My girlfriend saw me struggling. She had a small handgun and passed it to me. First I made the accomplice back up then I got the suspects off of our friend. I helped him up and we retreated.

Two of the suspects pursued us as we backed away (click here to see video). I told them to let us leave and gave them every chance to. One of them threw a Superman dive at me. As I was about to be tackled I shot until I stopped the immediate threat.

It’s difficult to explain how I felt. There wasn’t time for anger or wounded pride. I had just seen a guy attack a parked car. The guy who had just attacked the parked car that we were in was now attacking my friend, holding him down, and strangling him. One of those guys bit into my friend’s back like a crazy person and the same guy rushed me while I retreated (one witness said “like a raging bull”).

All I can do is speak from my feelings. Coherent thoughts were impossible. What would have happened to my friend had I not stopped the fight? What would have happened to me had he been able to take the gun? All that guy ever said to me was “Do you know who you’re fucking with?” How would you feel?

Unfortunately, I was the perfect scapegoat. I was an ex-con drinking at a bar with another ex-con. He and I were practically family but both labeled gang members, prohibited from association. Our civil rights were easily disregarded.

After shooting I made things worse and ran. Too often I’ve heard “If you weren’t guilty then why did you run?” Like check … and mate. That question is fair but isn’t the last word. For many years that cowboy wisdom sanitized the preceding events. Specifically a group assault on my friend and me by off-duty law enforcement officers which resulted in great bodily harm and easily should have met the criteria for attempted murder. This recreational police brutality was inflicted on someone committing no crime. BTW, I’d like to add that I ran twice. At that point, after I had stopped the attack, my people seemed relatively safe, so I fled.

I learned who the victim was on the morning news. He was an off-duty Sheriff/Good Samaritan who’d been tragically murdered. Police spokespersons said things like “the suspect is considered armed and extremely dangerous and…we just don’t know how this is going to end.” Those news clips are some scary shit if you’d been in my shoes. I fled the state and am alive today because of that action.

Two days later they hunted me down through an anonymous tip. Meanwhile, the State abused their power throughout the investigation. Several months after the incident and well before my trial the Sheriff was honored stating that he was ‘killed in the line of duty” and this was in a ceremony presided over by President George W. Bush. The preceding investigation covered up the officers’ illegal acts to support this bullshit “fallen hero” narrative. Both sides of the story were readily available to detectives because of officer testimony and contradictory physical evidence. They chose their side and my due process paid the price for a hero’s legacy.

There were two groups drinking at that bar. One included around fifteen off-duty officers. The other was me, my friend, our dates, and another homegirl. My friend fought with one of the cops and was ejected by the bar’s owner and a bouncer.

The prosecution had more witnesses than the defense. However, there were more defense witnesses to the actual shooting or events immediately beforehand. The bar’s owner (click here to watch an interview with him) was a defense witness. The State countered by charging both my friend and my girlfriend with first degree murder, though there was no case for that.

The security video was quickly confiscated by police. My mom worked for the city at the time. She heard an upsetting rumor that the tape was being edited to harm my case. She heard this because detectives worked closely with the IT guy from her department.

A public defender was assigned to my case. We didn’t get along because he wouldn’t look into any of my claims. He also wouldn’t look into the State’s evidence against me. My mom asked him to investigate the video specifically. He wouldn’t go watch it, ensure its integrity, or verify its authenticity.

Finally he eased my concerns. He sent copies of vouchers from the public defender’s department allocating thousands of dollars for investigatory work to be done on my behalf. I shut up and waited. No investigator was ever hired or work done on my case. It sure looks as if he kept the money though. His willful ignorance in my case was a pattern.

The unfairness I experienced wasn’t all illegal

I tried to fire my lawyer every way I could think of. I wrote to the presiding judge, requesting a new attorney because the current attorney was showing bad faith. To explain the video and investigation was difficult because copies of letters to the judge also go straight to the prosecution. Since I really didn’t have counsel I needed to keep my letter vague. The judge wouldn’t let me fire my lawyer because I hadn’t explained myself well enough. (See correspondence).

My entire trial was about distracting the jury with prejudicial matters. The case was built that way.

Me and my homie were brothers. We were out to celebrate his engagement – when he asked me to be his best man. Had he been killed I would have had to look his mom in the eyes and tell her what happened. What I did about it. People said things like “fellow gang member” to minimize our humanity.

The State presented their video evidence in court with footage removed (click here to watch the interview with the video expert). Immediately I noticed the missing scenes. During pretrial motions the State admitted to altering the tape. However they said those measures had only been taken to “slow down” or “clear up” the footage. (Click here to watch interview). The tape passed through at least three agents in two departments before ending up with the lead detective who testified. To his credit he said he did in fact do a good job.

My friend’s blood covered the scene. Per federal law the State had a duty to preserve this exculpatory evidence. He sustained serious bite wounds on his back in the attack. Much of the State’s case rested on officer testimony that my friend had merely been “subdued in a proper restraint”. The implication being that I had no need to defend his life. The bite wound and blood evidence countered their claim. So the State either refused to investigate that evidence or destroyed it.

The unfairness I experienced wasn’t all illegal. They didn’t like me, respect me, or protect my rights but I doubt it was especially personal. Nevertheless, they kept their thumbs on the scales a little bit. They acted unethically.  These are examples of legal injustice:

One defense witness with an excellent memory was honest to a fault. She was the only witness who’s entire testimony was confirmed by physical evidence. The prosecution cast doubt on her credibility by bringing up her old, irrelevant drug trafficking conviction . The judge allowed and encouraged this prejudicial line of questioning. The jury was prejudiced enough to disregard her entire testimony.

During his career, the victim had been fired a lot. He also tended to be “transferred” out of several police departments. This was due to a history of domestic violence. One especially bad incident made his wife file restraining orders. This happened late into her pregnancy after her husband’s most recent transfer.

The prosecution needed the Decedent’s widow on the stand. She hadn’t seen the shooting and had no information to offer except for the enormous impact a widow has on a jury. The prosecution wanted her testimony without the domestic violence stuff. There was a chamber’s conference about the matter.

Domestic violence wasn’t a big deal to the prosecution because there hadn’t even been proof the victim was drunk while he beat his pregnant wife. His widow downplayed the severity and confessed that most of the fights had actually been her fault for being “emotional”. The judge ruled the domestic violence did not constitute a propensity for actual violence. Further he found the jury should not hear about prior acts as they were more “prejudicial than probative”.

I fell victim to revenge prosecution. The entire proceedings were intended to cover for the victims. Their sleight of hand worked. I was found guilty of first degree murder with malice aforethought. Premeditated. I got life plus thirteen years.

Criminal appeals are generally met with assumptions. These assumptions include the following: Trials are fair, prosecutors are honest, and defense attorneys are competent. Appeals become complicated because the Defendant is at a point where the facts and evidence have been decided. Judges get a broad discretion on what facts to acknowledge and questions to hear.

My case hadn’t had an independent investigation. It eventually did but not until well into my first appeal. That investigation pursued several issues including the security video footage shown in trial. Aspects of that were: the condition of the actual tape shown and the original, the bar owner’s security system, and the footage depicted.

What if I had died that night? What do you think would’ve been said about me?

The footage appeared to have been edited. Scenes did appear to be missing. No one can conclusively state the condition of that footage because the original video disappeared from the evidence locker. There are two (totally different) chain of custody forms which both claim the original video is now in the city police evidence locker. Both forms are attached to one piece of evidence and although they tell two stories, both are demonstrably false.

The original video was confiscated from the bar soon after the incident. It was taken by an unnamed, unidentified State police officer. The original tape was from a multiplexing security system. That system was similar to but incompatible with VHS and there is no multiplexing security tape. This means the original tape is missing.  As the independent investigation for my case was taking place, a detective from the city’s Police Department said he knew the original tape had been destroyed.  The VHS wouldn’t even work on the owner’s system. A city police detective put a counterfeit tape into the evidence locker. In good faith the State can’t possibly explain this and my appeals judge ruled they will not have to.

For criminal appeals to even be heard they must meet a fairly impossible standard. Judges basically interpret the law to suit their taste. On top of that I’m a convicted killer claiming “I didn’t get a fair trial!”, “The tapes were tampered with!”, “The system is rigged!”, etc. People wonder why I stick to my story.

It’s not lost on me that I killed a person. I’m not writing this to attack his character. I’ve learned he was a father and I am sure he was better than his worst day. It’s for that reason I’m not saying his name. I’m attacking an unjust conviction that’s a product of (and supported by) police brutality and official misconduct. I’m not stretching the truth at all. And what if I had died that night? What do you think would’ve been said about me?

To me, this case couldn’t have been more personal The severe penalties imposed have irreparably harmed  my family and others involved.  Regardless of the private consequences, the implications of this ordeal reverberate further than just my little family. This case demands attention and concern  because it unveils and illuminates so many other structural problems that permit and even require  a deadly police culture. The media gave favorable coverage to the deceased officer without regard for the facts, earnest investigation, or respect for the lives and “rights” of the other people involved, contributing to a false but comforting narrative that allowed his  name on the national memorial wall for officers who died in the line of duty. The prosecution had no incentive to tell the truth, and many incentives to lie, obfuscate, and fantasize, so they stole my due process to transform an unstable officer into a fallen hero. My story is one clarifying  example of law enforcement creating whatever narrative suits their purposes when the truth is threatening. They employed both illegal and unethical methods, but did a very sloppy job. For the sake of justice, fairness, and any semblance of integrity, we call out for a reckoning. May it begin with my life and my family and reverberate to my neighborhoods, my communities, and all humankind who revere life and honor dignity.