Tuesday, November 12, 2013


I will get to Ernie Hernandez taking the Fifth - but like the Herald Montoya leaves out all of the key facts. 

My disclosure is I was not in court this morning.  I underwent a caudal on my back.  It was painful as hell.  I have known for some time numbing me or putting me under has become a problem.  They gave me the maximum dosage of the sedation allowed without an anaesthesiologist in the room and nothing - I felt nothing.  He did his best to numb my tail bone area before going into my spine - nothing - it hurt like hell.  But I am already getting a lot of pain relief - so it was worth it.

The new VA day surgery clinic is awesome.  The staff, the facilities, and my doctor were all top of the line.  Veterans are very fortunate to have this new facility.

I want to begin with DA Saenz's big loss.  Justice Hinojosa found that the charges were misdemeanors and not felonies as alleged by DA Saenz.  Most lawyers would call having felony charges converted to misdemeanor charges a major loss.  I wonder why Montoya does not disclose this simple fact to his readers.

During the process of invoking the Rule - keeping witnesses out of the courtroom - Guz Garza asked that the court ignore the Rule for one of his key witnesses.  Justice Hinojosa said not in his court.  Guz Garza chose to forgo the witness so they could be in the courtroom during the trial.

I wonder why Montoya did not mention this simple fact?

On Ernie not taking the Fifth - it is simple.  Luis Saenz and Guz Garza both being incompetent had Ernie Hernandez before a grand jury without a lawyer to guide him.  Competent DA's would kill to have someone they seek to indict come before a grand jury, and especially without an attorney to first prep the witness.  So the idea Ernie Hernandez is running from testifying is a lie. 

From the Herald:

"The commissioner called The Brownsville Herald late Tuesday afternoon and said he wasn’t trying to hide or avoid telling the truth.

“First of all, I was advised by my attorney not to incriminate myself. I was no-billed by a grand jury. There’s a sworn statement by me of about 35 pages of testimony,” he said. “I was advised that if I said one word contrary to that statement that I could be charged with perjury.”

See Herald

Editor's note:  I was not in court in the morning.  I heard this but was not able to confirm it so I did not include it in my original post.

All of Ernie's grand jury testimony will get in before the jury.  Why did Montoya not mention that?  So what the jury has is all of Ernie's testimony before the grand jury when he had no attorney to aid him.  If Luis Saenz and his paid off monkey, Gus Garza,  failed to get the testimony from Ernie Hernandez that they wanted when they had him before the grand jury whose fault is that?  Luis Saenz and his trained monkey.  Why has the Herald also left this out of its story.  Bias - it is that simple.  A moral compass is not having to get paid to speak the truth. 

Justice Hinojosa [note it is sad that the Herald, all TV news media and Montoya care so little about the facts they cannot even get Justice Fred Hinojosa's title correct].


With the exception of one factual allegation, everything I am saying is in agreement by both the prosecution and the defense.  I am limiting it to this because as Justice Hinojosa reminded the jury several times, opening statements are not evidence.  So with the exception of one disputed fact I am limiting the story to what the parties agree on.  Because again, opening  statements are not evidence.  It is worthless, except if you get caught lying to the jury during opening statement they will not trust you.

I want my readers to have something close to the jury experience, and not the endless rumors and manipulations by both sides.  This will better allow my readers to form an opinion based on the evidence and not endless lies and rumors.

Norma Hernandez never recommended that her brother get a job with the county.  She told him to try HEB.  This was Guz Garza speaking.   Raul's attorney agrees that his client walked Robert Cadriel to the office of Robert Lopez, head of HR.  Roberto Cadriel is Norma's brother, and Raul Salazar is Ernie Hernandez administrative assistant. 

No less than three times Guz Garza stated that because of a near drowning incident Robert Cadriel cannot read or write in Spanish or English.  This is not disputed by Raul Salazar's counsel.  So they agree.  But then Guz Garza tells the jury that Robert who cannot read or write in English or Spanish sat down at the computer and filled in by himself his general information.  Gus Garza then goes on to tell the jury that on the 4th test (the parties agree there were 4 tests - he passed two of them) based on answers given to him in advance he just read the questions and then filled in the answers on his own.  This  from a man who cannot read or write in English or Spanish.  Guz Garza could not keep his story straight.


Both sides agree Robert Cadriel failed big time the first two tests.  Both sides agree Carmen Vera took the third test for Robert Cadriel.  They should just stipulate to these facts and save the jury the torture.

Both sides agree a county employee by the name of Dalia is the hero in the story.  But to win Guz Garza must call her a liar.  By all accounts it was Dalia who worked to stop the hiring of Robert Cadriel.  She saw it was a con and tried to stop it.

Carmen Vera will testify, according to Guz Garza, that Raul Salazar told her to take the test.   This is where they divide.  Dalia who by all accounts is the sole hero in this story will testify that Carmen Vera told her that Robert Lopez told her to take the test.  Robert Cadriel will testify that Robert Lopez gave him the answers to the fourth test.  [FROM THE HERALD - "According to [ADA] Hinojosa, Lopez gave Salazar the answer key to give to Cadriel] Now, on these two last claims I approached Salazar's counsel and said "if you cannot prove these two claims you are sunk."  He said the claims are in written statements which will be put into evidence.  Of course, at trial the witnesses can change their testimony.  But it was the DA who claimed Robert Lopez gave Cadriel the answers, and not Raul Salazar.  So is the DA lying to protect Ernie Hernandez?

But let's assume for a minute Dalia testifies Carmen Vera told her Robert Lopez, who has immunity, told Carmen to take the test for Robert Cadriel.  Who do you believe Dalia who forced the story and corruption into the light, or Carmen Vera who admits to taking the test illegally?  Now think about this simple question, because this is the same question Raul Salazar's counsel will ask of the jury.  Who do you believe, the hero Dalia, or Carmen the test taker?

Now juries have surprised me.  They may decide to believe Daria is a liar.  I cannot see how Guz Garza intends to impeach Daria's testimony when she is the hero in the story.

Guz Garza is nothing less than a hit man for Saenz. The salary schedule [click - my numbers are based on what the county provided me] shows Guz Garza gets paid $106,000, to do Saenz' dirty work, while Gus Garza's boss, Rene Gonzalez [the First Assistant DA] only gets paid $95,500. Guz Garza got his butt kicked today when the charges were dropped to misdemeanors. According to Saenz this entitles Guz to a hirer wage that Rene Gonzalez. When the federal indictments come this documented fact will be the benefit alleged in the indictment.

And for the record it should shock no one the failed journalist Imp goes with Montoya's bogus lies for yet another made up story. And for the record - I have stated several times - the Hernandez family has paid me not a penny. God can print this in the sky for the Imp, and he will continue to point blank lie and claim I am running from the question. I had lunch with Norma once to learn more about who she is. A guest of hers got up and paid the bill for everyone but me. The waitress brought me a separate bill. I paid my bill and paid my own tip. I take nothing - never have and never will. I deal in facts. But the Imp has nothing to write except take lies from Montoya after trashing him and then calling that a story

You know what real men and women do, when they can unite, regardless of their differences, they unite to get the right thing done. This is why I can be critical of Dr. Juliet Garcia and still have a very pleasant and professional conversation with her.  This happened on Sunday.  This is why I can be critical of Judge Carlos Cascos and he and I can still work side by side for veterans. This happened on Saturday and Sunday.  This is why because even though I did not support Congressman Vela, who I personally believe is the best thing to happen to South Texas in probably a 100 years, can sit with me and talk policy concerning the port, veterans, and the Hemp Act of 2013.  This happened on Sunday. We are all professionals and agree to disagree  but in the end put the issues which unite us first.

And each of these people know I deal in  facts, documents and never take money.  All 4 of us know we are not perfect or flawless.  We have made mistakes in the past, and will make mistakes in the future, but in the end we are all about good policy for our community.  And as adults, at times we will agree to disagree.  But we do not need to assign nefarious motivations to one an other's ideas or motivations.  More on this another day.


Anonymous said...

"No less than three times Guz Garza stated that because of a near drowning incident Robert Cadriel cannot read or write in Spanish or English."

This entire case is ridiculous. If the above is true, why would Cadriel apply for a job that he knew he could not qualify for in the first place without committing perjury? And, secondly, how did he score a 30 and even with the answers on other attempts you have to be able to read to place them in the proper order.

And, both women could be telling the truth about who told whom to take the test. It could be a matter of both Lopez and Salazar telling Vera to take the test.

You do yourself no service by coming across as a buffoon and shill. You write: "Norma Hernandez never recommended that her brother get a job with the county. She told him to try HEB."
You have no first hand knowledge of this statement. It is purely hearsay. Yet, you state it as fact.

BobbyWC said...

This is how I know you have no interest in the facts. the following statement was made by Guz Garza the DA prosecuting Salazar.

"Norma Hernandez never recommended that her brother get a job with the county. She told him to try HEB."

You have no first hand knowledge of this statement. It is purely hearsay. Yet, you state it as fact."

You are right I do not have first hand knowledge of this statement, but then to believe your position I must then conclude Guz Garza with the DA's office lied to the jury when he said it. Are you saying Guz Garza is a liar? Are you saying I cannot trust what the DA is saying? I never stated it as a fact. Guz Garza stated it as a fact. All I did was repeat what Guz Garza is claiming to be fact.

Now the next part you did not know - so your comment is excused. You comment may actually be right - I made it clear that Raul's attorney better be able to prove what he is saying Dalia will say or he will have problems with the jury. So I am not saying it is a fact. I made that clear. What I said after I asked him about his statement he said he has her written statement.

And again, if he does not have it the jury will eat him alive and Guz Garza will be justified in pointing out Raul's attorney mislead the jury.

But if he does have it it will include Dalia stating Carmen Vela admitted she lied about Raul telling her to take the test. Again, if they do not have the statement or Dalia denies she said it, Raul will be screwed before the jury, and rightfully so.

I never defended what happened. That is why I outlined that both sides agree he cannot read or write and that he never took the third tests. No one is disputing Robert Cadriel never should have been hired. No one is disputing a crime happened. The only question is who ordered it.

You attack me with lies because you do not like the fact I asked a fair question - who will the jury believe the test taker or the woman who broke the story and helped bring about a criminal investigation? You do not like the question so you for the attack and distractions.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

You write: "Norma Hernandez never recommended that her brother get a job with the county. She told him to try HEB."

I will try again. This is verbatim what you wrote. You did not say that it was a quote from Gus Garza. It is presented solely as your affirmation.

I do not have the luxury of being present during the trail. If Gus Garza stated this in his opening remarks without attribution and as pure hearsay, it is a mistake and amateurish.

We agree about one thing. A crime was committed and crimes are routinely committed under Brownsville's good old boy, paternalistic code of ethics. It is the same system transposed across the border and has been the ruination of every country in Latin America. Meritocracy is considered a sacrilege. You see it everywhere. The town has no verguenza.

BobbyWC said...

Dude, why does your "verbatim" not include the sentence which followed where I said it was Guz Garza speaking?

"Norma Hernandez never recommended that her brother get a job with the county. She told him to try HEB. This was Guz Garza speaking."

What does "this was Guz Garza speaking" mean to you.

I personally believe Saenz is intentionally blowing the case.

They gave immunity to everyone who allegedly participated in the crime. Lopez has written admissions, Carmen Vera has written admissions. I do not know about David Garcia - that testimony could be interesting.

Are you telling me Guz Garza does not know the difference between a felony charge and a misdemeanor charge? They know the hero of the story will say Robert Lopez ordered everything. Why would the person who stopped the crime lie? How does Guz Garza impeach her testimony.

Remember Saenz only took the case at the insistence of the FBI. the FBI/DOJ then threw him under the bus with the Justin Ramos testimony.

I think Saenz is intentionally blowing the case. Guz garza made far too many mistakes in his opening statement.

Now Raul's attorney was admonished twice by Justice Hinojosa for getting into argument during his opening - but twice Justice Hinojosa overruled the DA's objection.

Yes there was a crime - there is even a bigger crime in how the case is bring prosecuted.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

What does "this was Guz Garza speaking" mean to you.

What do quotation marks mean to you?

BobbyWC said...

It means an exact quote which it is not - but it is what he said. I clearly attributed the statement to Guz Garza - you are only making yourself look desperate to defend that which has no defense. I only use direct quotes when it is a direct quote - but he said it. I am taking short hand in three languages and 2 alphabets. I also have about 50 marks which have meaning. Because of the way I take short hand only I can read my notes.

Buy you know as well as I do I said it was Guz Garza talking - the sentence makes no sense otherwise.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

Something which I did not raise because I really wanted to only talk about what they agreed on and the core question of who will be believed, but what about this. I have no idea of this is true. But the DA jumped up and said object not in evidence.

According to Raul's lawyer all of the interviews are video taped except one - that of Robert Cadriel - the man every agrees has learning disabilities. I am not saying this is true, which is why I did not include it - but if the evidence shows it to be true, what does it mean to you?

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Bobby your right Ernie Hernandez said that HE WILL GET ROBERT CADRIEL A JOB AT THE COUNTY. YOU HEARD THAT. It was said in Fiesta Graphics v

BobbyWC said...

wow, you idiots now have listening devices in my ear to know what I am hearing.

What you are saying was never said by anyone - but them lying is all you have based on pure hatred.

I said I was not going to discuss all of the back and forth tit for tat by the lawyers because it is not evidence.

I limited the tit for tat to one issue and that is Robert Lopez v. Raul Salazar - who did it - at least as to who gave Cadriel the answers - according to the DA Guz Garza it was Robert Lopez, not Raul Salazar - I then discussed the dispute about who told Carmen Vera to take the test for Cadriel - that is the heart of the case.

The BV is not a place for either side to put out their claims of evidence - which is why with the exception of one issue I limited my discussion to what they agreed on.

Now to your bogus comment.

Since there has been testimony how you know what Ernie said or dis not say is beyond me - pther than your need to pass on disinformation and hate.

I made clear and Justice Hinojosa made clear the statements by the lawyers in opening statements is not evidence - you obviously heard that as being the same as sworn to testimony.

What Guz Garza said is, Robert Cadriel the DA that Ernie Hernandez recommend he apply with the county. That is not a crime.

This is a claim of future testimony. The problem Guz Garza has is, he will need to explain why he does not have the statement on a video such as the other witnesses, and that the jury must just rely on the DA writing down on a piece of paper what the DA wants the jury to believe. Remember Guz Garza cannot read or write English. So he would not even know if what he was told was in his written statement was true. So without Robert Cadriel's testimony verifying the allegation they have no evidence on the issues.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

"Remember Guz Garza cannot read or write English."

I knew that Brownsville's level of education was low but I did not realize one could be an attorney and be bi-illiterate.

BobbyWC said...

Sorry should say robert cadriel in break robrt lopez testified ernie h called lopez into his office about posdible job. then raul salazar met with him and cadriel about dog catcher job. this test 3. Then later robert
loprz admits to giving raul salazar the answers to security guard test. but get this he claims he did not know why raul salazar wanted the answers.

Anonymous said...

Things are not looking good for Ernie. Do you think his attorney should try to work out a plea deal whereby he resigns and perhaps does community service. May be the only way to avoid jail and head off the upcoming state and federal indictments. As a former attorney, what would you advise?

BobbyWC said...

Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about - today's testimoney was bad for both sides - the story is coming - I will start with the testimony of Robert Cadriel - 2nd witness because his is the most direct to the issues

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

You write that Robert Cadriel cannot read or write in English or Spanish. Montoya has him at an intelligence level of a 5th grader. Which is it?

Not being able to read and write has nothing directly to do with intelligence. However, having a child's mind is a different story. How can a person with this level of intelligence testify? Remember that he got mixed up with the number of correct answers he should do.

Chew on this:


Anonymous said...

Low literacy or illiteracy cannot be equated with IQ ...


BobbyWC said...

Counsel's argument is not testimony - I do not remember which attorney said it in opening statement but one said he has the intelligence level of about a 5th grader - it is not evidence - it is an attorney making nonsense.

But when I finish my post above you will better see how I address your post - it is in part what I will discuss

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

On the literacy comment you are correct. The issue for me was can her read his statements, before he signs them. But in court today he does have an intelligence disability - what it is I do not know - but I will address it when I finish the above post

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Good reporting for those who cannot be in the courtroom observing this trial. I've looked at Montoya's reporting and it is completely biased. It really is a joke. So far, it appears a political vendetta against Ernie Hernandez. What a waste of taxpayers money!!! But it does go to show to what extent DA Saenz is willing to go after someone. The Yolanda Begum case is another clear example of his abuse of office. Prosecuting someone for calling her a fake. Another ridiculous case by the DA.