Friday, November 15, 2013


The jury took about 40 minutes,  Justice Hinojosa put an additional $50,000 bond on Raul Salazar.  Apparently one of the indictments did not have a bond on it.   Until the bond is posted, Raul Salazar will remain in custody.  I assume about now he is waiting to be transported to Carrizalez and await for his bond to be posted.  Any bondsman  for $5,000 will post the bond.

The Jury was studious and did their job.  There was sufficient evidence to convict and the jury did its job.  Justice Hinojosa provided both sides a very fair trial.  In my opinion the verdict is not subject to reversal on appeal based on the evidence.

A hearing on Pre Sentence will be Dec 11, 2013 at 9 a.m.  I believe because of the previous conviction Justice Hinojosa will give a sentence of 3 months to a year.  I could be wrong.  Public corruption convictions must include jail time.  The public demands it.

There are at least three issues of ineffective assistance of counsel.  In Dallas, and elsewhere at this point the trial attorney bows out so that ineffective assistance can be argued.  Ramirez fell for one of the oldest DA tricks in the book, he relied on the DA's subpoenas to get his witnesses there.  It came time for a defense and he had no witnesses because he issued no subpoenas.

Based on the developing story surrounding Pete Sepulveda, Ramirez at a minimum should have requested to reopen the case to call Pete Sepulveda to the stand, and if the judge denied the motion then made what is called a proffer of evidence as to what the evidence would show.  Error was lost on this issue because no effort was made to reopen the case.

Guz Garza told the truth about this case in his last two minutes of closing.  He said "Defendant Ernie Hernandez"  Ramirez did not hear it because he was too busy not listening.  Any competent attorney would have stood up and objected.  Ramirez did not because he was not even listening to Guz Garza's closing argument.  How do you argue error if you did not object.  Again ineffective assistance of counsel.

But in the end the verdict in my mind is good and will not be reversed on the evidence.  The verdict will hold on appeal.  The only hope at this point is for a new trial based on ineffective assistance of counsel.

I will predict - Ernie Hernandez will have an indictment against him soon and his political career is over.  His only hope is to get a hearing on a new trial for Raul Salazar and expose the truth about Pete Sepulveda and what is happening in HR.  Guz Garza made the mistake of making what is happening right now the cornerstone of his 15 minutes of closing.  If the evidence shows that Pete Sepulveda lied, I believe Justice Hinojosa will grant a new trial.

Remember every decision Justice Hinojosa made was as an appellate judge even though he is sitting as a trial judge.  He understands what the court of appeals will look at.  He made no mistakes.  And on the evidence the verdict is solid.


BobbyWC said...

It blows my mind how no amount of evidence will ever convince some people of anything.

I defy anyone to find anywhere wherein I commented on this case in advance of listening to the evidence. I watched 95% of the trial and last night said in all likelihood he would be convicted.

That is the BV - evidence

I am not going to allow for posts saying I defended Raul when there is zero evidence I ever said anything other than report the evidence.

I did not have to put for my readers the Mark Yates story so the claims by Lopez of retaliation could be bolstered.

I am the one who brought out the evidence concerning the politquera connection. My position on politiqueras has been 100% consistent - I do not tolerate it - period.

Now, right now my phone is ringing with endless rumors and claims and I am telling you the rejected anony - if you have a document to prove it I will post it.

Right now I have people mad at me because I am not posting the claims about what is happening in the Dancy building - but I will tell you what I am telling these people - bring me the document - I know for a fact there has to be a document to prove who is telling the truth and who is lying.

I want the document - when I get it I will post it - until then nothing guys - you can call all your want - nothing will get posted until I have the document

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

so with all this what happens to the Ernie guy? He is gonna get re-elected, that's Ernie.

BobbyWC said...

At this point it is anyone's guess. His only opponent is under investigation for a Class A Misdemeanor - what we could have come primary day is two candidates with pending criminal cases.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

damn….what an embarrassment. is this all we can get to public office…crooked guys with some criminal backgrounds. thank you for your posts Mr. Bobby.

Anonymous said...

(crooked guys with some criminal backgrounds. thank you for your posts Mr. Bobby.)

Thing is, I've known about Ernie and his "ways" since the late 70s. Remember when he opened a grocery store/convenience store on Boca Chica blvd? LOL!

Anonymous said...

slowly but surely all the rats are coming out of cameron county….ooooh wait, the place is highly infested, many many "rat" traps needed.

who's next?

BobbyWC said...

Apparently the Dancy bldg is in a free fall. Information is developing fast. On Monday I will be doing a lot of open records requests to prove what I am learning. If the information is accurate Salazar will get a new trial and Saenz could find himself upa creek

BObby WC

Anonymous said...

Do you ever worry you are contributing to the corruption of your town? How much is enough to sell your soul? How much is enough to let you sleep at night? Hope you at least sold it high.

BobbyWC said...

People like you are the people who stood at the tree and watched the black man hang because he talked to the white woman. You have no interest in anything but promoting your ignorance.

All I have done is report the facts. Do you really believe the Hernandez family paid me to post such a strong statement in favor of the verdict? Do you really believe the Hernandez family paid me to say Ernie will be indicted and his career will end?

I am the only one who spelled out the deal. Cadriel gets a job Robert Lopez gets the mail ballots. And the trial evidence along with election returns prove this simple hard core fact.

Do you really believe the Hernandez family paid me to say that?

Montoya will not print the truth because in his overly simplistict mind he thinks if anyone thinks Robert Lopez is guilty in all of this Ernie walks. Gus Garza argued Lopez can be guilty but that does not change the illegal conduct of Raul Salazar.

I have been told the jury to a person is mad as hell that Saenz did not indict Lopez. Lopez can be indicted in federal court. He is far from out of the woods.

If a motion for new trial is filed along with ineffective assistance of counsel some jury members will be called in to establish how the verdict would have changed without the perjury.

I have spoken to several members of the Cadriel family - They say Robert Cadriel lied about a drowning incident and medical records will show he was born learning disabled. Do I know if this is true? Nope - it is for them to bring the medical records forward. Why did Victor Ramirez not call Norma Hernandez to clear this up - all he cared about was getting out of there to get ready for a federal trial on Monday.

Victor Ramirez was so incompetent that during closing he did not mention that Robert Cadriel in his original statement said Robert Lopez gave him the answers and not Raul Garza. He never mentioned that Guz Garza turned to the jury and sybolically tore up his own investigators report and told the jury to not trust it.

You are saying I am promoting criminal conduct by investigating whether or not David Garcia and Pete Sepulveda lied under oath.

You are saying if I post documents which prove they did I am promoting criminal conduct.

How is that possible? Do you not want to know if someone lied during the trial?

No you do not because if you find out the white woman lied about the black man talking to her then you miss your joy in watching a black man hang for no better reason than your ignorance.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Bobby what does Montoya have anything to do with what you do and write? Why do you reference him on everything. As far as the black man being hung this is Border Town Bobby Mexicans get hung to. If is was you I will let this go and let the ax fall where it may. Those were your words. The ax did fall but you didn't like on who it fell on. You are looking like a sore loser. It is so obvious the Hernandez are paying you. If Salazar was to have been found innocent you would be calling Luis an idiot dick and demanding heads to roll on Carmen, Dalia, Pete, David and whom ever else the Hernandez told you to target. You would have claimed Victory for Erin Hernandez and Ernie Hernandez. Money will be tight for the Hernandez and it just seems you are just trying to have them give you a little more. Sad Bobby. You should just move on. Ernie and Erin do not have a leg to stand on. They Hernandez Klan is done with. The citizens of Cameron County are tired of their corruption. Yes they weren't the only ones but they orchestrated he bulk of it. If Ernie and Erin want to cut a deal with the DA then you should post what they are willing to offer for a deal. Now that will give you credibility.

BobbyWC said...

There is not an ounce of reality to what you are saying.

I said the verdict is solid and will not be reversed. How much clearer can I be. I made it clear the jury was studious and did its job. How in hell are such statements protecting the Hernandez family?

I said Ernie will be indicted and his political career is over. How is that helping the Hernandez?

I said the evidence was clear a deal was cut to get Robert Cadriel a job in exchange for the politiquera vote - how does that help the Hernandez family?

In fact you are so ignorant and driven by your ignorance and hate, that you fail to see that DA Saenz has already picked-up on my post about the election evidence and will use it in his case against Ernie - how does that help the Hernandez family?

You wanted a narrative which did nothing but promote lies and deception.

How do I know that? I am reporting that the claims of perjured testimony may be proven with documents. You say you want to end the corruption, but you are having a meltdown over the prospect of the BV posting documents which prove perjury?

Does not justice demand we punish perjury? According to you the answer is no if it means Raul Salazar gets a new trial. And that is the proof you are not interested in justice, just a result which fits what you believe.

You will also not I have no been specific because I have made it clear I will not publish the allegations until I get the documents. If they fail to produce the documents I will report there are no documents which prove their allegations.

You also have no concept of our justice system, a guilty verdict no more than an non guilty verdict means someone did or did not commit a crime. It means that a jury based on the evidence before them believe a person is innocent or guilty. That is all its means.

For this reason after endless jury verdicts of guilt in Dallas person after person is being released from jail because the the process failed and in fact they were innoncent not withstanding the verdict.

Judge Cornejo-Lopez just granted a new trial to Manny Velez [ a case prosecuted by Saenz] The Court of Criminal Appeals upheld her ruling. Why?- ineffective assistance of counsel.

Why do you fear the process? This is standard process. It is what happens post trial.

Even if a new trial is granted and Raul Salazar were to win does it mean he is innocent? - no it only means the state failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he is guilty. It means nothing more.

Guilty people walk all of the time and innocent people go to jail all of the time. The system is not perfect.

But we must strive to make it work by exposting perjury when it happens. This is protecting our system. This is ending corruption - something you oppose. You clearly believe corruption and perjury is okay if it hurts someone you hate.

You are very confused. Even if Justice Hinojosa grants a hearing and finds perjury, it does not mean Raul Salazar is innocent. It means there was perjury. Nothing more nothing less.

And for the record, I said Dalia is the hero in this case. That is why Guz Garza did not call her as a witness. Her testimony would have damaged her case. I said this from day one.

Victor Ramizer failure to have a subpoena on Dalia was a major act of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Everyone agreed including Gus Garza that Dalia was going to put all of the blame on Robert Lopez - but you know what - that does not mean he did not act as he did in exchange for the politiquera vote.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Why do we not have a jury verdict even though it is not foolproof? Put up one of those vote counters and have your readers decide if you are backing los Hernandez or not. Straight up and down. Then you just might get the drift, as in an avalanche, that has fallen on you.

BobbyWC said...

First of all every poll counter ever put up by any blogger has been worthless and used by almost no one. I can put one up and hit enter 3,000 that I am being objective - it would prove only that the process can be manipulated.

YOu refuse to answer even one of my questions because in every case the answer is, what I have typed about the case does not help the Hernandezs in terms of the questions I posed.

How can a jury verdict be full-proof? - are you really that ignorant? The verdict is good based on the evidence they had. Had I sat on the jury I would have found guilty, based on the admissable evidence.

But you miss the point - post trial motions are routine.

Ineffective of assistance means nothing to the state bar because the state bar knows they must be filed. It is almost a perfunctory motion. It is almost unheard of for an attorney to face a sanction for ineffective assistance because the Bar understands it is part of the process. If they start to sanction attorneys for ineffective assistance of counsel then no lawyer will be willing to argue it for fear of retaliation.

The reason post verdict motions are allowed is to correct problems. The jury had it right based on the admissible evidence.

But what you are saying is, if documents - not he said she said - but if documents showed at least three witnesses lied under oath, that is okay with you because you got the result you wanted.

That is not justice.

Here is a hard core reality for you. And I have already said this but you cannot seem to understand it.

This case can be tried a 1000 times and the jury will believe that Robert Lopez and Ernie Hernandez cut a deal - Robert Cadriel gets a job in exchange for the politiquera vote going to Robert Lopez.

The jury will believe that Carmen Vera took the test for Robert Cadriel. The jury will believe that on the fourth test the answers were given to Robert Cadriel.

The jury will also believe that Ernie Hernandez and Raul Salazar made calls to move the application process along.

I have written all of this and to you this is me defending the Hernandez family - can you really be that stupid?

The answer is no - you are driven by your ignorance and hatred.

This case can be tried a 1000 times and the only question the jury will ever debate is whether or not Raul Salazar authorized the test manipulation.

On the evidence which will always be undisputed the jury can find Raul Salazar guilty -a 1000 trials and none of this will ever change.

But the issue now is did people commit perjury. I want to know - you do not. Why?

You are so devoid of any understanding of the process, that you cannot understand just because maybe three people lied under oath, none of it changes the basic facts.

I will agree, on retrial it would mean Guz Garza's 15 minutes of closing will never happen again as he did it.

But I get it - you hate facts, you hate evidence - you hate truth which even supports what you believe because you are so blinded by your ignorance and hate you cannot even read my words correctly when those words support the verdict of guilty.

BObby WC

BobbyWC said...

I'm curious do you believe that Guz garza told all of the witnesses who did wrong that any promises he made them are not binding on the DOJ and the DOJ can now prosecute them?

Do you think that is right that Carmen Vera may have been mislead about whether or not she can be prosecuted? Do you think had she been told she may still be prosecuted by the DOJ, that she would have hired a lawyer and taken the 5th?

Did Gus Garza tell her that by not taking the Fifth the feds could possibly prosecute her.

Did Guz Garza tell her that because of the way the deal was structured that now any attorney can take Carmen's testimony to a grand jury and get her indicted, along with Robert Lopez?

Guz Garza threw Carmen Vera under the bus and did not give a crap what happens to her or Robert Lopez.

If Justice Hinojosa gives Salazar a hearing to prove perjury, and the documents , not he said she said, proves perjury by Robert Lopez, then Guz Garza is on record as saying Robert Lopez will be prosecuted if he lies.

If Saenz does not then prosecute Robert Lopez, what does that then say about Saenz? It says he was soliciting false testimony.

I have not published the specific of the allegations because that is all they are. I know enough to know if they are true, there are documents. Which is why I said - no documents no story.

And if they fail to produce the documents the story will be the claims were false.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Actually, I am pretty good at reading. No offense and I do not mean to be pedantic but the correct spelling is foolproof, not "fullproof". It is a common mistake but it can save you some embarrassment down the road.

"How can a jury verdict be full-proof? -"

I'll try one more time. You obviously picked sides in this small town tragedy. It has nothing to do with hate or ignorance. You made your bed and now its lights out, bedtime.

BobbyWC said...

One other thing, I am the only blogger to go on record that the verdict merits jail time. Now explain to my readers how that helps Raul Salazar.

You cannot so you will simply dismiss the truth

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

With all of my readers, I have 2 people - based on IP addresses challenging my coverage. The reason I am willing to have this discussion with the only 2 people challenging my coverage is - it proves a point - no amount of evidence gets in the way of ignorance and hate.

They refuse to address any of my questions because the answer to every question is my statements do not help the Hernandez family.

I state I would have found Raul guilty and this means I support the Hernandez family.

Before the trial the BV posted not one statement on the merits of the trial - not one - during the trial not one statement in support of Raul or the Hernandez family - but somehow I am backing them.

I pointed out conflicting testimony. That is fact which is in the record.

And again, the BV is the only blog calling for jail time - it is that simple. How does me demanding jail time help Raul?

But 1-2 people think they can use distractions and lies and all of a sudden my readers who have come to trust me over years are going to cut run.

All you have is a spelling distriaction with no response to any of my questions or even a cut and paste from any of my postings which support your claims.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

This is not a debate because the other person bases his/her comments on mere speculation without facts. He/she has a personal agenda and no amount of facts on your part will be comprehended or acknowledged. He/she is trying to get you to stoop to his/her level-- let it go at that.

His/her spelling distraction proves that this person knows not of what he/she speaks.

The other bloggers depend on tit elation to push their agenda of smut. You are the only one who presents the facts to allow us to formulate our opinions.
Thank you----blessings. ;D

Anonymous said...

The whole city knows you were protecting the Hernandez family Bobby. You were giving legal advice to Raul Bobby. Now you see that people are overwhelmingly against them and you want to jump ship, You said yourself that tomorrow you will make many PI requests...requests that help Raul Salazar and the Hernandez family. Just stop already,'s pathetic.

BobbyWC said...

So you interviewed 200,000 people and know what they think - I would much rather be reading a book in the sun around my pool - which is how I spent most of my morning.

You and maybe one other person are basically the only person posting this nonsense.

Again you cannot copy and paste one thing I every said in favor of Raul Salazar before the trial - it does note exist.

I went to the trial - I covered the evidence - something you hate - you love the fact Montoya and the Herald never printed that Robert Cadriel initially said it was Robert Lopez who gave him the test - why? Because that goes against what you want to believe/

I lead that day's story with Cadriel pointing the finger at Raul Salazar. Montoya made no issue of it.

The more you post the more people believe you are a lone wolf out to paint a distraction.

And what you are saying is, if I am told a document exists which proves perjury by a witness I should not pursue that. But like I said if the document does not exist I will still report the story and say I was lied to.

That is the danger in telling me a document exists when it does not.

Bobby WC