ADELA GARZA A HARD NO FOR TSC - SHE PROUDLY STANDS WITH THE CORRUPT SAENZ FAMILY

THE ANTI-INCUMBENT REVOLUTION MUST CONTINUE - VOTE ADELA DOWN

Saenz would never sue me on this issue because he knows what I can prove.  He wife Delia Saenz turns a blind eye to the corruption because she likes the money.  Adela Garza. is desperate to be part of the cliche which keeps Cameron County oppressed, because she needs to be relevant.

If you vote for Adela Garza you are rewarding the bad conduct which denied Maria Fidela Garza and Mary Tipton justice.  Any public official who turns a blind eye to Saenz criminal enterprise for an endorsement should not hold any public office.

Also do not forget how she humiliated herself and our education system when she ran for Congress.  

At minute 2:44 listen to her say when she is elected to Congress and goes to DSC to implement all of her promises.  As if not knowing it is DC and not DSC, she seems confused that as only 1 of 435 members she is powerless to do anything on her own. She either lies or is ignorant.

Adela Garza:  "I am going to implement everything you have told me the last few years"

She makes the above statement after stating when she goes to DSC - our capital is Washington DC, or DC for short - not DSC

I can go on for pages, but the injustice after the murder of two innocent women should be all you need to vote No on Adela.  We need to demand Adela apologize to these families for her support of Luis Saenz and his wife, Delia.

Also do not forget TSC still does not have a job training Liaison with Space X or the port to insure we are providing the necessary job training for the new jobs soon to come online.

NO ON ADELA GARZA - YOU SUPPORT SAENZ YOU OPPOSE JUSTICE FOR THESE MURDERED WOMEN.

WHAT IS ADELA GARZA TURNING A BLIND EYE TO? - THESE FAMILIES WANT JUSTICE

MARIA FIDELA GARZA WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE JUSTICE

During the 2024 legislative session, at the request of Texas AG Paxton, the law was changed to make it easier to remove Saenz from the office of DA.

The law is not 100% clear, but it basically says for official misconduct on all issues since his election are subject to review.

It will begin with day one since Saenz retook office.  Saenz' client Sandra Blanco allegedly killed Maria Fidela Garza as a pedestrian.  Blanco was on the run for 15 years as Saenz' client.  When Saenz took office he had Pete Gilman seek to dismiss the first degree felony case against Saenz's client Sandra Blanco.  Round one did not work.  Even Judge Euresti would not go along.

So Euresti forced the appointment of a special prosecutor.  Blanco was on the run from a first degree felony, and Euresti gave her probation.

BV archives:  "This morning in a state of panic, Luis Saenz went to court and spoke with Ed Cyganiewicz and Louis Sorola, before the plea."

Ed Cyganiewicz was made the special prosecutor, since Saenz was conflicted out.  Louis Sorola substituted in as Blanco's defense counsel. Cyganiewicz was also the special prosecutor in the cases of Saenz nephew by marriage.  You know the case where the victim was left nearly dead on the side of the road. That will also be in the removal action. 

Who gets probation on a first-degree felony case after being on the run for 15 years?  I had an eyewitness who was Sandra Blanco's roommate who told me Blanco's daughter was giving her the money to get Saenz as the DA to dismiss the charges. 

I will be posting example after example.  It will take days.

I will not be the plaintiff in the removal case.

WE GET SOME JUSTICE FOR MARY TIPTON BY VOTING HELL NO ON ADELA GARZA

THE CASE OF MARY TIPTON WHICH WILL BE USED IN REMOVAL OF SAENZ, WHO PLAYED ALONG WITH VISITING JUDGE BANALES TO ENSURE THE DEFENDANT WALKED

This case is tragic at so many levels, but mostly because Mary Tipton, the woman killed did not get justice.  The truth is justice, even if the criminal defendant walks, so long as on the truth Mary Tipton would have received justice.

Marisa Hernandez was charged with "failure to render aid" 

Based on the criminal charge, I believe the case could have gone either way had Judge Banales not tainted the jury deliberations with the spoliation instruction.  This basically allowed the jury to infer the missing evidence was in the criminal defendant's favor.  But there was no missing evidence.  

The missing evidence was Marisa Hernandez along with family searching the area where she thought she hit someone or something.   The tape was changed, edited, who knows the truth, allegedly by the investigating detective.  It showed Mary Tipton being hit, but then the part of the video showing the search was gone.

HOW SPOLIATION WORKS

Clearly in a case of failure to render aid, a video of the defendant and the family searching for a possible person who may have been it, is more than enough for a not-guilty verdict.  This is why I say without Judge Banales playing free and lose with the law, Marisa Hernandez still could have been found not guilty.

You see, all of the people in the field with flashlights looking for a possible victim were allowed to testify that they went out to the field to see if they could find someone so they could render aid.  That testimony if properly presented should have been enough for a not guilty. Although the possible negative is how long it took to do the search.  A jury could have believed because it was dark and raining, Marisa Hernandez needed time to find help.

The jury could have gone either way.

BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT HAPPENED

There was no basis in law for Judge Banales to issue the spoliation instruction.  All of the evidence which was on the missing part of the tape got in as live testimony, which is always better than a video take. 

The only damage I saw for the defendant was the time lapse between the hit and search. Given it was dark and raining the jury could have found that was cause for the delay. But the impermissible spoliation instruction was all but Judge Banales telling the jury to find the defendant not guilty.

Saenz's office could have filed a mandamus to stop the spoliation instruction.  A day or two of delay would have allowed the court of appeals to rule on the matter.  I have done the research and his is the proper procedure. In re State ex rel. Weeks, 391 S.W.3d 117, 125-26, (Tex.Crim.App.2013) (orig. proceeding

Again, the issue of justice is not the result, but how you get there.  The defendant could have been found not guilty without the spoliation instruction and then the case would have been clean.  But Saenz let it pass, and Mary Tipton was denied justice.

This along with other cases involving Banales will be cited in the Petition to Remove Saenz.  This is how Mary Tipton will receive justice.