Slaughtered A Child And Hit The Evidence — Judge Had To Step In

追加: 2026-05-15

[00:00:00]the night of the murder tells the police that this was a strategic hit that was called on by the Mexican mafia because of a snitch and no one ever looked.

[00:00:06]>> All right. So state who who did you confer with?

[00:00:09]>> Uh Mr. Garan and I know that he's new to the court but >> no thank you.

[00:00:23]>> She had to recuse because she had represented one of the witnesses.

[00:00:27]>> All right. So what discovery are you do you not have?

[00:00:32]>> So specifically as I as I uh let you know last time we were set judge when you said this there is um there was an arrest of the victim and the witness who identified my client in this case two days prior to the murder that we believe is exculpatory and that it lays out a possible motive for the murder by this other man who we believe committed the murder. They were released um after a 4count car chase. I mean, I want the police reports related to that and I want the I want to know what the deal was that was made with those people because it's pertinent to my client's defense. And we've been they've known about this since November of 2019 because when that witness dropped a dime and had the police come out to talk to him, the first thing he told him is he got arrested with the dead guy two days before he was killed. So, they've had this information this entire time.

[00:01:16]They've given us a two-page police report, but it outlines a 4ount high-speed chase, lots of people involved, and that there were statements taken and they were released. And I'm asking for the records like the what happened there and no one can get that for me.

[00:01:29]>> All right, >> Mr. Ghan, >> your I spoke briefly with both defense council on this case. However, uh I'm not I'm not certain, but I don't know if you that those victim and the witness were arrested federally or what exactly charges or if there was charges. I'm unaware of that. Uh >> does anybody know the name?

[00:01:54]>> Yeah.

[00:01:55]He is the state is aware of it whether or not Mr. Garham specifically is aware of it because they did give me a discovery the police report the report of investigation by the US Department of Homeland Security and it says that they referred the case to the 81st Judicial District for further prosecution and that's what I've been requesting and I've been requesting the records of Las County and and these are things that it is very difficult for us to get from the outside as defense council. Um, and so, um, that's why I filed a motion for a motion to dismiss for one of speedy trial because if the state is not complied with 3914, then I'm put in an uncomfortable position where I'm either waving my client's right to a speedy trial by requesting more time or I'm perhaps preventing him from due process at trial. So, you've got two constitutional rights and which one should he have to wave? So, if they're not going to produce it, I would really like to go to trial on Monday, judge, >> or I'd like to dismiss. Well, judge, again, first I've heard that it was in the 81st district uh just right now. Uh anything with the US Department of Homeland Security, that's the federal uh government. We don't have access to that, nor is it in the state's possession. However, any first district is the state of Texas, and I will do my due diligence to >> All right. And so, I know that you're brand new on the case. I know this came from the 290th the police report that you have.

[00:03:20]>> I requested originally from Christina Escalona. She gave me the police report.

[00:03:23]I have I further requested from her the additional information about have there been any deals made or was there recording. I've raised it with every prosecutor. I raised it with >> Do we want to subpoena Christina Escalona?

[00:03:35]>> And it's in the report the 81st district.

[00:03:36]>> All right. So let's let's do this.

[00:03:38]>> I want to clarify too that report is a homeland security report. It is a federal report. All right. So, here's the thing. Let's do this. Are you able to make a copy of that? Give a copy of that to Mr. Garan.

[00:03:50]>> Yes. It has my bar number because it came from eiscocovery.

[00:03:53]>> No, no, no. I understand. I understand.

[00:03:55]>> So, so you don't need to make a copy. He can have that.

[00:03:58]>> He can have it.

[00:03:58]>> All right. So, Mr. Gan, um, whatever is in that report, that's what the defense is asking for. Now, if it's something that's with Homeland Security and that's not under your purview and you can't have access to that, we'll have a hearing on it and and we will have a hearing on it. And if somebody wants to bring me some case law that says that the state is responsible for obtaining information from Homeland Security, then I will hear it. If there's something that says, "Yeah, they're responsible for um something from Homeland Security," then the court will hold them responsible for something from Homeland Security. Here's the issue with this court. I place things on the docket. I have a process here. I'm sorry. This case was transferred for the 290th. And I can tell you this, this case that was transferred from the 290th, there is nothing on the docketing sheet to show that anything was done in the 290th. I don't know why people don't write on the docketing sheet. I'm not holding any judge accountable for that.

[00:05:05]But the first thing that I have on this docking sheet is from August 2022. And it's in my handwriting.

[00:05:12]And what it says on here, all discovery receive per defense council. And I know you were not the defense attorney on that at that time.

[00:05:19]>> I I was I was just not present that day, judge, but when we when we were here in December, you set this for a hearing for them to bring the people for exactly what you're saying today. I don't want to reset it again. I'd rather just have trial without the information.

[00:05:33]>> So, this is what I'm doing.

[00:05:36]Uh, state when can you have whatever witnesses you need to have subpoenaed for a hearing on discovery if it exists?

[00:05:45]And when can somebody do their research on case law? And I'll do my research to find out whether or not the state is technically responsible for what Homeland Security has done. Well, >> because that's a new one for me.

[00:05:59]>> Well, judge, I mean, we could do our research on that. I'm pretty certain that we're not responsible for turning over any records from them security.

[00:06:07]However, I mean, obviously, defense council did obtain some some files, I guess, from eiscocovery that were in our our possession at some point and that's why it was turned over. Uh, if it's in our possession, we'll turn it over. Um, however, with other counties, uh, I don't believe we're even responsible for getting other counties from other districts to get their police reports.

[00:06:30]However, I myself am saying that the state we will try to get that for them, but I I mean, I believe Case 11 says that they're not responsible for obtaining those records um, from other counties. So, I I don't even know what witnesses I really necessarily need to bring.

[00:06:50]And if they're from other counties, I I mean the power is limited there. But I mean at the same time, I don't believe that the state is actually obligated to be turning over uh reports or files from one federal government or two from other counties outside the Bear County jurisdiction.

[00:07:08]>> Okay. And judge respectfully, when there's a witness who the night of the murder tells the police that this was a strategic hit that was called on by the Mexican mafia because of a snitch and no one ever looks into the possibility that someone's a snitch, I'm being completely crippled in my ability to defend this man who I believe to be innocent.

[00:07:22]>> Okay, >> judge, I believe you have this power just as much as the state does.

[00:07:25]>> All right, so this is what we're going to do. Uh, Miss Ferguson, you know, my assume Yeah. She's like, I want no part of this.

[00:07:45]>> All right, Miss Ferguson, >> can you give me a jury trial setting on this case and uh put it at the 45day mark?

[00:08:02]>> Uh, no.

[00:08:04]Okay.

[00:08:07]So that will be April 3rd and then Miss Ferguson.

[00:08:13]>> Well, I'm sorry. Just one second. Let me look at Just give me one second, Miss Ferguson.

[00:08:23]>> How long are you all expecting this trial to last?

[00:08:28]>> Well, judge, I mean, it depends on what witnesses are found and brought in. All right, let's let's do this, Miss Ferguson, because I already know where I am that April 3rd is sort of a short month for me because I have to take care of some medical appointments. Um, put the jury trial.

[00:08:49]Are we a are is criminal trial division up the first week in May?

[00:08:54]>> Uh, yes.

[00:08:55]>> All right. Put the jury trial that that first week in May. What date will that be?

[00:08:59]>> May second.

[00:09:00]>> All right. So May 2nd will be the jury trial date and the plea deadline date.

[00:09:06]Then on all of these motions, we can have the motions hearings. We can do that at the beginning of April.

[00:09:17]>> And so what date would that be?

[00:09:20]>> We can do either the third or the 11th.

[00:09:25]>> 3rd or 11th. Everyone >> of April.

[00:09:28]>> Of April.

[00:09:32]Oh, Norman, let's not do April 11th.

[00:09:35]That's a Tuesday.

[00:09:37]>> The third is better.

[00:09:39]>> So, April 10th or April 3rd?

[00:09:43]>> Better suited the mayor.

[00:09:46]>> All right. So, April 3rd will be uh motions and uh discovery. I already have a discovery acknowledgement signed.

[00:09:57]>> Yes. And there's been discovery since that was signed. has been uploaded. So I think that's >> all right. So April 3rd will be for any discovery issues. Jury trial will be May 2nd and that will also be the plea deadline date.

[00:10:11]>> And and I know we're not on the record, but just Mr. Garand aware, I've also filed motions to have them designate which jail calls they intend to admit because they gave me over 800 jail calls and no idea which ones to hunt for. Um that should be in the court's file. I've se I've seen that motion, judge, but uh in all honesty, I haven't listened to all the jail calls yet, and I don't know which jail calls I would be presenting at this point.

[00:10:32]>> Okay. All right.

[00:10:33]>> So, we're sort of in the same boat on that.

[00:10:35]>> Yeah. So, I mean, we'll have a motions hearing and discovery on April 3rd.

[00:10:41]>> Anything else?

[00:10:45]>> Judge, I I do actually because Chance has been incarcerated for almost three years now. um his bond is something he can't even begin to make and it's been not his delay that has caused this. I would ask that you allow him to have a PR bond with a leg monitor or something like that.

[00:11:01]>> All right. I'm not going to give a PR bond for a murder case, but if you all file a motion and present whatever you need to present, I'll consider a reduction.

[00:11:09]>> We'll discuss that again with >> All right. Anything else? All right.

[00:11:13]Anything uh Mr. Stelzic? No.

[00:11:16]>> Thank you.

[00:11:16]>> All right. You're welcome. All right.

[00:11:18]Thank you.

[00:11:23]A Texas murder case exploded into chaos when defense attorneys claimed critical evidence had been hidden for years. And what they revealed in court stunned everyone. Nearly 3 years after the defendant's arrest, the defense argued they were still missing records tied to a 4count high-speed chase involving the murder victim and a key witness just days before the killing. But the most shocking moment came when the attorney alleged the murder may have been a strategic hit connected to the Mexican mafia and accused investigators of ignoring an alternate suspect theory entirely. As tensions rose, the defense warned the judge that their client was being forced to choose between two constitutional rights. The right to a speedy trial or the right to a fair defense. The judge, clearly frustrated by the delays in missing documentation, set the case for trial while demanding answers about the disputed evidence and whether prosecutors were legally required to obtain federal records.