Thread: Opening statements begin in Baltimore beheadings case

Wow, Brian. Way to stay on top of that one!

This was in 2005. I hope their visas are now expired and they put the bunch of them back over the border.

http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20060630 ... -2385r.htm

Opening statements begin in Baltimore beheadings case
By Keyonna Summers
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published July 1, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
BALTIMORE -- Opening statements began yesterday in the retrial of two Mexican illegal aliens accused of nearly beheading three young relatives in their northeast Baltimore apartment.

Prosecutors said DNA evidence will prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Adan Canela, 19, and Policarpio Espinoza Perez, 24, strangled, beat and slashed the throats of Ricardo Espinoza, 9, his sister Lucero, 8, and their male cousin Alexis Espejo Quezada, 10.

Assistant State's Attorney Sharon R. Holback said there is still no motive as to why the children were slain.

But witness testimony placing the men at the crime scene along with a bloody glove, jeans and shoes tested by new, improved technology that excludes more than 99 percent of the Hispanic population in the U.S. will prove their guilt, she said.

"These two men slaughtered these children methodically, brutally [and] horribly," Miss Holback told jurors yesterday. "Through science you will hear the voices of Ricardo, Lucero and Alexis, and they will say my blood is on [their] hands."

Mr. Perez and Mr. Canela, the children's uncle and cousin, respectively, entered the courtroom in handcuffs and shackles yesterday, with their hair slicked back and wearing suits contradicting their accused status.

Defense attorneys say that lack of a motive and eyewitnesses and insufficient evidence will kill the state's case.

"The DNA in this case is not cut, it is not dry," said Nick Panteleakis, Mr. Perez's attorney. "The government doesn't know what happened. They're going to present a jigsaw puzzle and hope you can solve it for them. ... Almost every family member could match this piece of DNA they're talking about."

James Rhodes, lead defense attorney for Mr. Canela, said police "jumped the gun" when they arrested the men in May 2004. Police also randomly questioned dozens of other Hispanic-looking persons waiting at bus and train stations in the city, he said.

"This was one of the sloppiest, most convoluted pieces of police work I've seen in 10 years," said Mr. Rhodes, who agreed with Mr. Panteleakis that officers were overwhelmed and felt pressure to solve the high-profile case amid interest from the governor and public.

Mr. Rhodes maintains that his client is innocent and said that his cross-examination will prove that Mr. Perez used Mr. Canela as an alibi.

The first trial last year ended in a hung jury after five weeks of testimony.

This time, the men's fate will be decided by six male and six female jurors, along with six alternates. They include eight black women, eight black men and two white women.

Attorneys speculate the trial could take weeks.

The case will resume Monday.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ ... -headlines

From the Baltimore Sun

Summary of case
The 2004 killings of 3 Mexican children and the subsequent trials


June 30, 2006

Ever since the slashing deaths of three children May 27, 2004, in Northwest Baltimore, city residents have tried to make some sense of the brutal crime. But it has not been easy. The victims and the defendants, Policarpio Espinoza and Adan Canela, all are part of a large family of illegal Mexican immigrants who moved to Baltimore. Few of the family members speak English, and the relationships among the relatives are confusing.

When the first trial, last summer, ended in a hung jury, jurors said they were frustrated by the confusion and by unanswered questions, particularly concerning motive.

"It was a big puzzle and a lot of missing pieces," said juror Keith Brown, who said he voted to convict one defendant and acquit the other.

This guide summarizes what The Sun has previously reported about the crime, the people involved and the first trial.


Second trial
Began with jury selection June 22, 2006, in Courtroom 1 of Courthouse East in Baltimore Circuit Court (related story); Spanish-language interpreters will be present throughout.

Judge: Circuit Judge David B. Mitchell
Prosecutors: Assistant State's Attorney Sharon R. Holback (main) and Tony N. Garcia (second chair)
Defendants: Policarpio Espinoza, 24 (Attorney: Nicholas Panteleakis); Adan Canela, 19 (Attorneys: James Rhodes (main) and Adam Sean Cohen (second chair))

Policarpio Espinoza is Adan Canela's uncle and an uncle of the dead children. Adan Canela is a cousin of the dead children.

The charges: Each defendant is charged with three counts of first-degree murder and three counts of conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. The conspiracy charges involve "persons unknown," alluding to other possible perpetrators. (related story)

The Baltimore state's attorney's office is not seeking the death penalty for either man. (related story)

Victims:


Lucero Espinoza, 8 (female)

Ricardo Espinoza, 9 (male)

Alexis Espejo Quezada, 10 (male)

Lucero and Ricardo are siblings. Alexis is a cousin of Lucero and Ricardo.

Relatives:

Victor Espinoza Perez
Oldest brother of Policarpio and Ricardo Espinoza Perez

Husband of Guadalupe

Father of Adan
Guadalupe Juarez Hernandez
Wife of Victor

Stepmother of Adan

Ricardo Espinoza Perez
Father of Ricardo and Lucero

Older brother of Policarpio; younger brother of Victor

Husband of Noemi
Noemi "Mimi" Espinoza Quezada
Mother of Ricardo and Lucero

Wife of Ricardo Espinoza Perez

Aunt of Maria Andrea
Maria Andrea Espejo Quezada
Mother of Alexis

Niece of Noemi

Possible romantic interest of Victor and Adan
Notes: Relatives of the dead children have consistently said in interviews and testified in court that they do not believe Policarpio Espinoza and Adan Canela are guilty. (related story No. 1), (related story No. 2)


First trial
Began with jury selection July 6, 2005, in Courtroom 1 of Courthouse East in Baltimore Circuit Court; Spanish-language interpreters were present throughout.

Judge: Circuit Judge Thomas Ward
Prosecutors:Assistant State's Attorney Sharon R. Holback (main) and Tony N. Garcia (second chair)
Defendants: Policarpio Espinoza (Attorneys: Timothy M. Dixon (main) and Nicholas Panteleakis (second chair)); Adan Canela (Attorneys: James Rhodes (main) and Adam Sean Cohen (second chair))

Key DNA evidence: One pair of blue jeans found in the trunk of the Pontiac Grand Am used by the defendants was stained with the children's blood and had inside skin cells consistent with Canela's genetics.

A second pair of blue jeans was found in the Baltimore County home of the defendants. Those jeans were stained with the children's blood and had inside skin cells consistent with Espinoza's genetics.

Black loafers worn by Espinoza when he was arrested had on them a tiny droplet of what is most likely blood. The droplet contained DNA consistent with the youngest victim's genetics.

Two bloody gloves also were found in the Pontiac. Both had DNA consistent with Espinoza and one also had DNA consistent with Canela. (related story)

The verdict: Trial included five weeks of testimony and about 300 pieces of evidence. Jurors deliberated for 10 days before Judge Ward declared a mistrial Aug. 30 because of a hung jury. Jurors reported being split 6-6 on whether to convict Canela and 8-4 in favor of convicting Espinoza. (related story No. 1), (related story No. 2)


Basics of the crime
The three children were killed May 27, 2004, in their bedrooms at the family's apartment in Northwest Baltimore. The Samester apartment complex is on Park Heights Avenue in Fallstaff.

All three children were beaten and had their throats cut so deeply that they were nearly decapitated. The boys also were strangled. (related story)

The children were students at Cross Keys Elementary School and were killed about 4:20 p.m., just after coming home from school. (related story)

The children and the murder suspects all are part of a large family of illegal immigrants from a small village in Veracruz, Mexico. (related story)


The motive
Motive has remained a mystery. Prosecutors said during closing arguments of the first trial that it was "some secret buried in the family." Defense attorneys have suggested that the children may have been the victims of a hate crime. (related story)

During the first trial, Canela's attorneys suggested that Canela's father, Victor Espinoza Perez, was responsible for illegally transporting people from Mexico and had a romantic interest in one of the mothers of the slain children. Neither suggestion fully developed into a theory for the crime. Canela also had propositioned Maria Andrea Espejo Quezada, the same woman his father was interested in, her testimony revealed. She said she rejected both men. (related story)

Prosecutors said throughout the trial that Espinoza and Guadalupe Juarez Hernandez exchanged a flurry of phone calls the day of the killings, raising suspicions about her.

--Julie Bykowicz




http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/local/ ... -headlines

Same suspects, slightly new strategy
Subtle changes in child killings retrial
By Julie Bykowicz
Sun reporter
Originally published July 1, 2006
There were subtle differences - in style, not substance - yesterday as the retrial began in the case of Policarpio Espinoza and Adan Canela, two Mexican immigrants accused of slashing the throats of their three young relatives.

Jurors in the trial last summer could not reach a verdict, an outcome that some of them attributed to confusion about the evidence and the lack of a clear motive in such a brutal crime.





Lucero Espinoza, 8, her brother, Ricardo Espinoza, 9, and their male cousin, Alexis Espejo Quezada, 10, were killed May 27, 2004, in their bedrooms in the family's Northwest Baltimore apartment. All were beaten and nearly decapitated; the boys were strangled.

Opening statements yesterday showed the lawyers might have taken cues from the first trial.

This time, the prosecutor bluntly stated in her opening, "We don't have motive." Instead, she emphasized DNA evidence as she described bloody clothing and gave jurors probability figures on whether the genetic evidence is tied to the defendants.

"We might not have motive, but we sure as heck have DNA," Assistant State's Attorney Sharon R. Holback told the freshly seated panel of 12 jurors and six alternates.

Although this opening statement included a more detailed preview of the evidence, Holback revealed no new bombshells.

The defense attorneys made little eye contact and sat separated by an empty chair - gestures that reflected Canela's new defense tactic of blaming Espinoza.

James Rhodes, who represents Canela, 19, spent much of his opening telling jurors about "a large amount of evidence" against Espinoza. By contrast, Rhodes said, "no DNA places Adan at the scene of this incident."

Jurors in the first trial reported being split 6-6 on whether to convict Canela and 8-4 in favor of convicting Espinoza.

In his opening, Nicholas Panteleakis, who represents Espinoza, 24, repeatedly compared the case to "a puzzle" with pieces that don't fit, language that seemed to be borrowed directly from a juror in the first trial, who called the case "a big puzzle and a lot of missing pieces."

"The government doesn't know what happened," Panteleakis said. "They're going to present you a big jigsaw puzzle and hope you can figure out what happened."

In her opening, Holback tried to explain why the puzzle pieces might not all be there.

"This is a family murder," she said. "This is family killing family. They are not going to tell you why their children suffered and died."

Espinoza is an uncle of Ricardo and Lucero, and Canela is a cousin to them. Alexis, a cousin of Ricardo and Lucero, was not related by blood to the defendants.

The victims, the defendants and many relatives immigrated illegally to Baltimore from a small village in Veracruz, Mexico.

Holback hinted that relatives of the slain children would again be testifying. But she told jurors that "they know, but they're not going to tell you" what happened to the children because they are "too scared."

The parents of the children, Noemi "Mimi" Espinoza Quezada, Maria Andrea Espejo Quezada and Ricardo Espinoza Perez - who is the brother of Policarpio Espinoza and an uncle of Canela - were not in the courtroom gallery yesterday during opening statements.

They were a regular presence during the first trial, which began July 6 and ended Aug. 31.

Circuit Judge David B. Mitchell told the new jurors to prepare themselves for a long summer.

"It's a marathon," he said, "not a sprint."

julie.bykowicz@baltsun.com

http://wjz.com/topstories/local_story_184090614.html

Jul 3, 2006 1:08 pm US/Eastern

Re-Trial Continues For Men Accused Of Killing Kids
(AP) Baltimore, MD The mother of one of three children nearly beheaded in an unexplained mass killing took the stand Monday, the first witness in the retrial of two relatives accused of the grisly murders.

Maria Andrea Espejo told jurors the killings opened a "wound that will never close."

Espejo and Mimi Quezada, the mother of the other two victims, have expressed doubts that the defendants, Adan Canela, 19, and Policarpio Espinoza 24, could be the killers.

Canela and Espinoza are being retried after their first trial ended in a mistrial last summer. They were arrested a day after the children were found nearly decapitated in their Baltimore apartment in May 2004 and have been in jail ever since.

Prosecutor Sharon Holback asked Espejo why she did not look at the defendants, sitting a few feet away. The mother, speaking through an interpreter, responded that she couldn't find the words to explain why she did not look at the defendants.

Policarpio Espinoza is the children's uncle, and Canela is a cousin.

In opening statements, Holback described the slayings of 9-year-old Ricardo Espinoza Jr., his sister, 8-year-old Lucero Espinoza, and their 10-year-old male cousin, Alexis Espejo Quezada, Espejo's son.

Ricardo was strangled with a cord and beaten in the head with a baseball bat before his neck was cut almost all the way through.

Alexis was strangled by hand before his head was nearly severed. Lucero also was beaten in the back of the head before the knife was used on her.

The prosecutor conceded the motive for the killings is "murky," but said evidence against the defendants, including DNA collected at the crime scene, is strong.

Defense attorney James Rhodes has suggested the children may have been murdered for lack of payment by family members for being smuggled into the United States. The family is from Tenenexpan, a small town in the Mexican state of Veracruz. The children were born in Mexico and emigrated to the United States with their parents.

Nicholas Panteleakis, who is representing Espinoza, has said the lack of motive shows prosecutors don't know what happened.

Defense attorneys also contend frequent contact between family members could explain the DNA found at the scene.

http://washingtontimes.com/metro/200607 ... -8065r.htm

Questions try to link mother with killings
By Keyonna Summers
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published July 7, 2006

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

BALTIMORE -- Prosecutors say the mother of two of the three children found slain in May 2004 knew about the killings days before they were carried out.

Mimi Espinoza Quezada testified yesterday that she spoke alone for about 15 minutes with her husband's brother Policarpio Espinoza Perez, 24, and his nephew Adan Canela, 19, a day after she suffered a miscarriage and a day before her two children and their cousin were nearly beheaded.

Mr. Perez and Mr. Canela -- two illegal aliens from Mexico -- are accused of nearly beheading Mrs. Quezada's children, Ricardo Solis Quezada, 9, and Lucero Solis Quezada, 8, and their cousin Alexis Espejo Quezada, 10.

Mrs. Quezada told jurors yesterday that her husband had asked Mr. Perez and Mr. Canela to check on her following the miscarriage. But, she did not disclose the contents of the conversation she had with Mr. Perez and Mr. Canela the day before the slayings.

Assistant State's Attorney Sharon R. Holback hinted that Mrs. Quezada was reluctant because she played a role in the killings.

Miss Holback asked Mrs. Quezada why she prayed to St. Jude Thaddeus, the Catholic patron saint of lost or impossible causes, instead of calling the children after they did not check in with her after school on May 27, 2004, the day of the slayings.

"If your children called you 'every single day' [after school] and they didn't this day, why did you pray instead of calling them?" Miss Holback asked. "Why didn't you call your children and warn them?"

Mrs. Quezada and Alexis' mother, Maria Andrea Espejo Quezada, have testified that they "sensed" something bad had happened as they drove home from work on May 27.

Mrs. Quezada testified yesterday that she "felt desperate" to get home to the children as she waited for another relative who was driving to leave a bank.

"I felt I had a very bad headache, and I felt desperate," she told jurors, adding that she did not know why she didn't call home. "I wanted to get home, but there was a lot of traffic."

Prosecutors also have suggested that Mr. Canela's father, Victor Espinoza Perez, played a role in the slayings. They contend that he might have been angered when Alexis' mother rebuffed his advances and that he might have made threatening comments when he picked up Mrs. Quezada from the hospital days before the killings.

The theory that family members might have played a role in the slayings fits the defense's suggestion that the killings are linked to a family secret surrounding the family's failure to pay debts associated with a human smuggling ring.

At times yesterday, Mrs. Quezada appeared uncooperative, saying she either couldn't remember or changing the dates and times of key events.

Defense attorneys argue that it is logical that she might have made misstatements during recordings made less than 12 hours after her children's deaths. They also said praying to saints is common.

Prosecutors asked why she hesitated when asked if she would tell police if she knew who killed the children.

"I might have hesitated because ... all of this makes me very tense to remember this all over again," Mrs. Quezada said. But, "of course, even if I lost my own life for it [I would go to the police]. ... There's no way I'd cover up for something I shouldn't cover."

When asked whether anyone had threatened her, she refused to answer in front of the jury and asked to speak with the judge. The jury was told to leave the courtroom.

After a conference with the judge and the attorneys, Mrs. Quezada told jurors that she suspected that Maria Andrea Espejo Quezada's ex-husband was involved in the crimes.

If convicted, Mr. Canela and Mr. Perez face life in prison. The first trial in the case ended last year in a hung jury.

Witness testimony will continue today.

Man that is one messed up family. Sounds like inbreeding......Some more of those good family values that Bush keeps talking about??