Monday, September 26, 2016


MAGISTRATE VALERIE GARCIA ONLY CHARGED MARISA HERNANDEZ WITH INJURY DUE TO ACCIDENT NOT DEATH

At the time Valerie Garcia, Magistrate Judge, working for the City of Brownsville, set bond based on injury from an accident instead of Accident Involving death, the evidence was clear - the crime was accident involving death.  Why was it changed to accident involving injury when the clear evidence was death not injury.  This certainly would have impacted the bond.

There needs to be a full investigation as to when Ernersto Gamez was retained and if he pursuaded Valerie Garcia to change the criminal charge from death to injury.

Something smells very rotten.

For the record I only secured this document after the AG ruled in my favor on an Open Records Request.  Why did the city try and hide this document which clearly shows Valerie Garcia changed the criminal complaint from death to accident.

16 comments:

Anonymous said...

A magistrate does *not* charge an individual with the commission of a crime. The State does. The magistrate's duty is to look for the elements of probable cause and set an appropriate bond to assure further court appearance. These are the facts. Your headline is bullshit.

BobbyWC said...

Yes, and the facts show death not injury. So based on that fact how does she arrive at injury. Your game of words does not play here. The formal charge comes in the Indictment which makes clear it is in the name of the State. But the magistrate looks to the alleged facts and issues bond based on those facts and the facts showed death not injury - so you are wrong. And for the record she gradudated from one of the worst law schools in the US. Thomas Cooley. Look it up. One of the lowerest post employment rates in the US with no major law firms recruiting from the law school.

If she does not know the difference between injury and death then the city needs to remove her as a magistrate judge

Bobby WC

Bobby wc

Anonymous said...

The complaint is the charging instrument in cases like this. Would you have prefered a dismissal for defective complaint, or a bond set to insure further appearance? It is my understanding that at an initial arraignment, the magistrate can either find insufficient probable cause and dismiss, or find probable cause and set bond. A magistrate has no jurisdiction to alter the charge against the defendant.

BobbyWC said...

the judges manipulate the charges way too often. the police report showed death which is not injury. that is the bottom line. So she could not have found injury when the report showed death. An investigation is merited. I get Valerie and her friends will create distractions. there is no debate Mary Tipton died and was not merely injured. And why did the city fight so hard to keep this withheld from the public.

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

So are you saying that the original charge 550.21 should have been changed by the judge, or that the judge demand that the complaintant ammend the charge before proceeding?

BobbyWC said...

she should have looked to the facts - death not injury. there are more problems. the original police report is falsified. Also it is different than the deposition.

What you are saying is, if an officer writes up a report which says rape. but cites the crime of pick pocket the magistrate should charge pick pocket and not rape as alleged in the report. You do realize how obsurd your argument is.

The magistrate is no a robot to just sign off on things, she is to read the documents and inquire - that is how bond is set to determine flight risk . why can she ask questions about flight risk in assessing bond but not the crime?

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Did Gamez make a judge believe that Mary Tipton survived the hit then, on her own, walked away and staggered into the shadows, dying away from the accident scene, making it feasibly improbable to not only not find her body but to determine whether a human or a skunk had been hit

BobbyWC said...

there is zero evidence gamez even knew about this case at this point. There needs to be an investigation of how a police report which shows death is reduced to injury. If Garcia was mislead then let her come forward and accuse the police of misleading her. I will certainly post her statement as a free standing statement.

Bobby wC

Anonymous said...

In your more absurdium counter argument, there was not probable cause for being charged with picking pockets. The bond was apparently sufficient, as the defendant did make further appearences. I think you owe Judge Valerie an apology. What did she do in violation of statute? It would seem that she did read the documents as the bond amount was not a $1500 P.R. bond.

BobbyWC said...

The police report is pretty clear about the victim being thrown over the vehicle and smashing the windshield. Did the officer lie to Garcia? Did Garcia have a duty to ask the officer the condition of the victim, who was clearly dead? It was sloppy and the question is why?

Only a full investigation can answer this question.

Bobby WC

BobbyWC said...

I have the police report released by the BPD - what else they are hiding I do not know. I am going back to the AG they continue to withold documents. The police report describes in detail the accident after the body was found. She read the report and did very sloppy work - bottom line

Bobby wC

Anonymous said...

http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/TN/htm/TN.550.htm

Give it up. Judge Valerie acted correctly.

BobbyWC said...

First thanks for posting a statute which you believe supports the judge. It tells me you put effort into your response, and the BV always rewards these kinds of post. to my readerrs this is how you do a post.

Having said that the statute you cite says third degree for injury, second for death. On the police report is says nothing about injury. It simply says failure to render aid without stating if it was an injury or death. She made no effort to inquire as to which violation applied and assumed injury. The police officer left off injury or death. She had no business making a charge without finding out if the provision for death or injury applied.

You did a good job in going to the statute - but read it.

The police report which I will post does not inform her of injury or death and she should have inquired. She did not. But I respect your effort.

Bobby Wc

BobbyWC said...

This is from the statute you cited. The officer in his report described a horrible accident and stated failure to render aid but did not state if it involved injury or death. You seem to be saying she had no duty to inquire and guessing is acceptable.

(c) A person commits an offense if the person does not stop or does not comply with the requirements of this section. An offense under this section:
(1) involving an accident resulting in:
(A) death of a person is a felony of the second degree; or
(B) serious bodily injury, as defined by Section 1.07, Penal Code, to a person is a felony of the third degree;

Bobby WC

Anonymous said...

Sir,you are correct in the assessment. It should also be noted that all reports/complaints are proof read by the officer's direct supervisors and approved for accuracy!! Complete fail!

Joseph Fielding said...

Now that was an earfull. . . I just found the skunk . . . Its at the courthouse.!!!