Almaraz trial goes to the jury

ADVERTISEMENT

He then gave the assembled jurors an overview of the information he said proved Almaraz was guilty.

“The defendant went to the bar that night with fellow gang members,” he said. “He interacted with a man who was wearing a shirt that was the color of a rival gang. There was an interaction between the defendant and the victim. After that interaction, he went out and rummaged through a car.”

Lee said he believed Almaraz obtained a gun from Matthew Grover’s vehicle, a man who has previously testified he gave Almaraz the keys to his vehicle. Lee then said Almaraz returned to the bar and approached Flores.

“The exchange took approximately 30 seconds. At the end of that exchange, he attacked Gabriel Flores,” Lee said. However, Bishop asserted the gun would have been lost in the melee, because of the large amount of movement between the men. In his rebuttal, Lee said all of the people in the immediate area were involved in the melee, yet the shot was still fired. Lee also said Almaraz ran from the building and disposed of the bullets and weapon. Jurors then viewed a taped interview between Almaraz and Fruitland Police Department Capt. J.D. Huff which took place shortly after Huff informed him his hands would be tested for gunshot residue. Huff then left the room, leaving Almaraz alone.

“He rubbed his hands,” Lee said. “Even licking his arms and rubbing them on his shirt to mechanically remove what might be found there.”

Lee also asserted that police discovered bullets in Almaraz’s closet that matched the caliber of weapon used in the shooting. He also reiterated Almaraz’s former girlfriend, Ismelda Longoria’s testimony that Almaraz requested she remove those bullets from his room. He also said that Longoria testified Almaraz swore at her when she informed him she did not remove them. Lee also referenced audio in which Priscilla Mata contacted Almaraz about her husband being charged with the shooting.

“Almaraz said he would step up,” Lee said, referring to a part in the audio where Almaraz said he would confess to the crime. He then spoke more about the altercation.

“Gabriel returned and Almaraz attacked,” Lee said. “This is supported by everyone who testified except for Mike Smith, who is clearly wrong. The video shows that Almaraz attacked Gabriel.”  

He then ran through the laundry list of eyewitnesses: From Priscilla Mata, who testified she saw a gun in Almaraz’s hand and a puff of smoke, to Connie Lake, who said she saw Almaraz put the gun in the waistband of his pants as he fled the scene, and Kenneth Hust, who also testified he saw Almaraz put a gun in his waistband as he headed for the door.

Lee also mentioned Almaraz’s quick exit as he said the rest of the bar remained in shock.

However, defense attorney Van Bishop disagreed with this assertion in his closing statement by playing video of the moments after the shooting.

“Look at the number of people going out the back door,” he said.

He asserted Almaraz’s exit did not symbolize guilt, but rather fear of further gunplay.

“Hector was like ‘I’m not going to get shot,’” Van Bishop said.

Bishop also commented on Lee’s assertion that Flores was killed because he wore a red Chicago Bulls jersey, a color which represents a rival color for BMC — a gang connected with Almaraz.

“Why is the red shirt so important?” Bishop asked the jury. “To me, it’s a red herring.”

He also said he did not believe Almaraz had time to fire the weapon at Flores, stating Almaraz was only in line of sight of Flores for a short period of time before he was shot.

“It’s a third of a second,” he said, counting off the time. “Not one, one thousand. Just one.”

Bishop also said bar employee Gary Garrison would have felt the weapon fire, since he was near Almaraz and testified he felt movement under his arm during the shooting.

“The gun didn’t burn him, he didn’t feel the percussion,” Bishop said.

He then said Garrison did not look towards Almaraz after the shot, choosing instead to look behind him.

Bishop said former gang member and prosecution witness Tommy Salazar was inaccurate in describing the location of bullets found on a nearby lawn after the shooting.

In Lee’s rebuttal argument, he asserted Salazar had not been to the area before and it was dark, which caused him to misstate the lot’s layout.

However, Bishop continued to point out Salazar was charged with accessory to murder charges.

“He said ‘oh, that didn’t bother me at all,’” Bishop said.

However, Bishop said he would be concerned with those charges.

Lee said Salazar’s was by no means a “squeaky-clean witness.”

However, he again referred to other witnesses’ testimony which supported Salazar’s statements.

“Simply because his testimony is damaging to the defense, does not mean it should be dismissed as untruthful,” Lee said.

Bishop also referred to the gun wrapped in Almaraz’s shirt found near Club 7, stating it could have been placed there by Mata, Salazar, or any number of people involved in the case.

“Is that as reasonable or possible or plausible as what Tommy is telling you about the shirt?” Bishop asked the jury.

However, Lee said jury members must look for reasonable doubt and not focus on imaginary doubt.

“These theories are not reasonable in this case,” Lee said. “You know that by the evidence.”

Bishop concluded his closing with a final thought.

“Did Hector do it?” he asked. “He might have. He could have. But ‘might have’ and ‘could have’ are not enough. The state hasn’t proven it, and we don’t know who the shooter was.”

Lee closed his rebuttal by focusing on those left behind.

“Gabriel Flores left behind a wife, five kids and a life,” he said. “And Hector Almaraz is the man who shot him.”

The jury is currently in deliberation.