Sunday, March 23, 2014



On December 16, 2013, Judge Hanen questioned the juror who was on Emma Perez-Trevinos' Face Book.  My source is solid.  I have verified the source has access to the juror.

This juror ignored Judge Hanen's order to not go on the Internet.  This juror ignored Judge Hanen's order to not discuss his testimony concerning the issue of his alleged misconduct.  On this one I am assuming such an order was given - otherwise why seal the hearing and questioning?

My source is saying the juror told the source that he just wanted the trial to be done and that was all he posted.  This is a substantive summary of what my source heard the juror tell my source.

Here is the problem - we have a juror who clearly ignored the orders of the court.  Given this undisputed fact how can Judge Hanen for one second believe this juror followed the jury instructions concerning deliberations.  This juror cannot seem to keep his mouth shut.  I will not disclose his name because in the end one bad juror is not a basis to make all jurors think their names are going to be posted on the Internet.  For me our jury system is too important to our system of justice to have jurors being concerned about being trashed on the Internet by name.

But if all this guy wanted was to get out of there, how can any judge form the opinion the juror took his duty of deliberations seriously?  The judge cannot.

Further, we know that originally the jury was asking for a mistrial because two jurors were never going to change their mind from not-guilty.  How influenced was the jury to just get out of there by this one juror?  Was the influence enough to get the two who were adamant about a not guilty verdict to simply give in?

I know a lot of people do not get it.  I am not about the result.  I am about the process.  Personally, I think Armando Villalobos is guilty as sin, but that is not how our system works.  If the process failed him then he is entitled to a new trial.

His attorney needs to do two things;  [1] file the Motion of Fraud on the Court FRCP 60 over the issue that the federal prison system was ready to receive Villalobos when they clearly were not.  It is simply not tolerable for the DOJ to lie to a federal judge; and [2] she needs to file a Motion with the Court of Appeals asking for bond for her client based on the Fraud on the Court and the fact this juror committed black and white misconduct and that no judge could possibly know the impact the misconduct had on the verdict.  Villalobos should be free pending his appeal.

Pending before the court is Villalobos Motion to have opened the transcript  from the sealed hearings related to the jury misconduct.  Once I get my hands on that transcript I am certain my source at the ABA Journal will take the issue national.  This is a hot issue in law.  There are a lot of reversals based on jury misconducted related to jurors going to the Internet.  This is why -independent of all the threats and claims everyone and their brother George was claiming I was bought and paid for by the DOJ and Villalobos lawyers, that I did not allow for comments related to the evidence or innocence or guilt.  I assumed the jury was reading the BV. 

I considered it an extraordinary privilege to be allowed to blog the trial and I wanted to keep justice at the center of what I blogged.  Further, when blogging live from the court I believe it is incumbent upon those of us reporting that we give our post the  full dignity of the court.


Anonymous said...

The juror you're talking about, I believe he was on the internet blogs and online newspapers.
It seems that the majority of us get caught up into the internet media and other sources available to us just by a simple click.
I can tell you this, there is no justice in justice for anyone. If media prints it, people believe it.

The juror was wrong in doing this!

What makes my stomach turn is that, when we get together in the jury room to discuss and deliberate of course, after the judge had instructed everyone on the what's and whatnot's.
As a previous juror myself, no one that has served as a juror likes it; and mind you to sit in a long trial especially when a holiday is just around the corner and might have to continue over the weekend once again, because this happened to this trial.

Please keep in mind....

Just as anyone that maybe reading this,(if you served as a juror) take a good look at yourself in the mirror, you know exactly what happens and goes on as a juror.
I dread hearing adults complain and cry on that Monday morning from the prospective juror room, when your sitting all day long being board to death, until you hear your name called out of pull of jurors to be picked for a trial.
There maybe 1 of 10 people who like to serve the community and feel they can make that change to the community.
REALLY, in what world do they live in?

I for one, hope that this juror gets a taste of hell in jail.

Judge Hanan knows he was wrong, it's an "occupational catastrophe" to admit it.

BobbyWC said...

We can only solve problems when people are willing to be as frank as you - thanks for extending the discussion. This is when the BV works best

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Judge Hanan is as much to blame for allowing this misconduct to miscarriage the trust of the process and the faith of the people for a fair and just trial.

Judge Hanan himself questioned DOJ, as to the validity of the prosecution, during the trial. His comment in court room, "when will you begin to try this case!?" , at a point when the DOJ was almost done presenting the prosecution speaks volumes.

BobbyWC said...

I do not remember the comment, but I do remember him telling the DOJ a lot of the evidence was flimsy.

Judge Hanen's problem is balance. He wants to make sure everyone is treated fairly - but he needs to learn to be more stern in enforcing his orders.

He is too easy on attorneys not doing their job. Sometimes he gives attorneys too many chances to get their act together.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

I can see an appellate panel throwing out the money order evidence as a big stretch. years ago this would not happen - bit now the 5th Circuit is more balanced and he could get a more open minded panel - but he could also get a panel which just wants to hang him based on the charges independent of the evidence

bobby WC

Anonymous said...

If that is the case, then what is good for the goose is good for the gander. Castro with DOJ and that lying thief ODLF should be sharing a jail cell. Too bad the aforementioned comments have no affect on the Appellate procedure.

BobbyWC said...

this is where Mando is messing up - if the ABA journal were to take the story on jury misconduct his case will get national attention - in McAllen did not a federal IG just get jail time.

Mando and his lawyers can force Eric Holder - with national attention to investigate the local DOJ and the deal they cut with ODLF to protect their own. the DOJ IG who ran cover for Ponce and Castro did not have an ounce of credibility. It was all cover-up - but Mando fails to understand how to get his story out so he will do his 13 years

bobby WC