The Taoseno and Karma
Though I won’t go into depth here about what it means to be a Taoseno, I will say that you need a dose of suffering leavened by a sense of humor to understand the tragi-comic feeling that forms one’s psyche here in “The Soul of the Southwest.” Contrary to stilted remarks by politicians or letter writers in The Taos News, do-gooders and newcomers should know that one must “suffer to be wise.” It’s not about paying your taxes or contributing to the community coffers.
For an outsider to become a “Taoseno,” he or she must experience the joys of victory and the pains of defeat. Then turn and look over his or her shoulder and laugh, however briefly, at the irony of redefining one’s life in Taos terms. As I often remind political activists, including experienced politicians, you’ll begin to understand this place after you’ve lived here long enough. It’s a learning experience: even if you lose, you can win because you have gained carnal knowledge of the place and people.
When your enemies self-destruct and are punished by the Sacred Mountain for their hubris, nothing is sweeter. For me and many others in the community, the epistle of reprimand, laid down by the Disciplinary Board of the Supreme Court of New Mexico, denoting an endless series of violations in the case of local judicial king pin, District Attorney Donald Gallegos and his hit man, Deputy District Attorney Emilio Chavez, is a sign of community revitalization.
The Code of Silence and Retribution
It took an outside attorney to pierce the veil of “omerta” which surrounds the professional guild that protects participants in the justice system from ethical scrutiny. When the average citizen or non-member complains to the Judicial Standards Board, he or she is likely to be dismissed as a case of “special pleading.” But if the attorneys themselves offend other attorneys and judges while undermining the rule of law and the system and there’s a paper trail, say issuing 75 to 100 Hometown Subpoenas without vetting by a Judge or Grand Jury, then the seemingly moribund judicial system wakes up and cries out against “professional misconduct” and “prejudice to the administration of justice.” Finally, amen.
We Taosenos know that what Donald and Emilio have done to the community, corrupting cops and judges by trying cases, despite outrageous violations of due process (see below). But we also know about unsolved and unprosecuted murder cases, unprosecuted rape and molestation cases, cases dismissed either due to laziness or a quid quo pro at the legislature, say the prosecutors’ pensions, or the trade in votes for justice, let her (or him) go, we’ll vote for you. Even Donald’s neighbors from his hometown say, “If you want to get away with murder, do it in Questa.”
In the wake of the Disciplinary Board’s public revelations about Mr. Duck’n Cover and his Lapdog, I have been contacted by citizens from other communities, telling me how the DA refused to confront municipal corruption in Raton or how the AG, one Gary King, also ignored pleas for an investigation, as have folks from Taos also pleaded to no avail.
And before the DA or DDA tell you Whaley has a special bone to pick, let me tell you I do. Donald even published a backhanded prayer in The Taos News aimed at invoking the Lord to support the DA’s righteousness and punish me, his critic. I kid you not. Anyway, apparently, the Lord has decided otherwise.
You can’t be a philosopher or witness to the doings in Taos until you yourself have suffered and experienced injustice. But it’s the murder victims’ mothers and fathers who have really suffered as well as my misdemeanor relatives. As Phil Sanchez, whose family suffered mightily at the hands of the DA, who let the perps run free, once said: “Do your job and nobody criticizes.”
Ask the Judge or the Grand Jury for permission to issue a subpoena and the Kit Carson Robbery case goes to trial. Now we, both KCEC members and members of the public, must pay for the incompetence and arrogance at the DA’s office as the robbers walk. Or Was Mr. Duck ‘n Cover protecting incompetence at the KCEC?
The Stain of the DA
Here are some excerpts from a story about cops and robbers I published earlier this year on Taos Friction. Notice the players: DDA Emilio Chavez, former DA prosecutor and now District Judge Jeff McElroy; former town cops, now candidates for sheriff, Ron Montez and Jerry Holgrefe. This stuff came from the court hearings and the officer’s video cams.
During the trial of Edmond Evensen, who was accused of attempted armed robbery and assault with a deadly weapon, and, according to video evidence, obtained by Taos Friction, the town cops and one Taos County Sheriff’s Officer, persuaded staff (a security guard) at the Don Fernando Inn to open up the room, without a court order, where two suspects, Mr. Evensen and his ten-year partner, Amanda Cruz, lived on a month to month basis.
Why call a judge when you can call on the private security guard?
During a taped conversation, Sgt. David Trujillo tells Town of Taos Police Chief Jerry Holgrefe that while interviewing Michael Santistevan (security guard) he learns that the suspects have a room at the Don Fernando Hotel and that the officers received consent to search—(they) “opened it for us.” Trujillo goes on to say that the knife was on the floor and already seized. Taos County Sheriff’s Office (Deputy Cordova) cleared it.
Deputy Cordova never turned on his chest camera (recording device) but certainly, the Taos PD did.
Trujillo mentions to Holgrefe that the clothing in and photos of the inside the room, including a blue hoodie, which the alleged male suspect wore and says that when we dress the guy, we’ll put the clothing on (him). He’s wearing it out now to the car, wearing the hoodie. It’s Jim’s case. (Officer Jim Black.) During a video of the arrest, Officer Black, I believe, says “I never dressed a guy in handcuffs before.” Officer Ron Montez is shown rummaging through a pile of clothes, apparently looking for the suspect’s clothes.
While Montez is rummaging, an officer reads the suspect his rights—anything you say may be used against you. The suspect says he doesn’t have an ID or driver’s license due to a prior DUI.
(The suspect apparently was hiding in his bed when the cops burst in to the occupied motel room.)
The victim of the alleged robbery and assault, Steve Vigil testified during the abbreviated trial that a woman, Amanda Cruz, came up to his truck after he withdrew a sum from the ATM at United Bank next to the Storyteller movie theatre. He turned off the ignition and rolled down the driver’s side window, partially, to speak with her. Then, from his rear an arm with a hand holding a knife reached round and held the blade against his throat. The voice said, “Give me your money or I’ll kill you.”
Vigil says he shoved the arm away, started the engine, and drove in reverse. The two would-be robbers scattered in two different directions and though, as Mr. Vigil repeatedly said, “I was in fear of my life”–he chased the man in his truck round the Storyteller lot but didn’t find him. Later he saw the female come out of the bushes and walk toward the Don Fernando. At one point, Vigil also testified that he called 911, hence the police.
Sgt. Trujillo testified that he called the ambulance while interviewing Vigil, who was unable to name or describe the suspect except vaguely—a situation the police remedied down at the cop shop lineup, when Trujillo says, according to the video, to the suspect, “That’s our boy, upper left hand corner (of the monitor).
Evensen was charged but not Amanda Cruz. Indeed Cruz was charged by the state police in Oct. of 2012 with forgery, identity theft, resisting arrest, and concealing identity but those charges were dropped in early May 9, 2013. Though on May 6, 2013 she was charged with escape, possession, and resisting arrest.
To make a long story short, Amanda was never charged as an accomplice in the Nov. 1 (All Saints” Day) armed robbery and assault incident. During trial she showed up in shackles and orange jump suit, crying, and expressing mixed emotions about accepting an offer of “immunity” from the district attorney.
She wanted to change her mind and asked Judge Jeff McElroy, how long she would get if she didn’t testify. The Jolly Jeff, whose bench-side manner, is remarkable, whether asking potential jurors questions or while engaging with witnesses, kindly told Amanda that he’d keep her in jail until she testified.
Evensen’s defense attorney Alan Maestas had filed a motion to suppress the alleged ill-gotten evidence but Jolly Jeff had denied the motion months back. (After all, he worked for DA Gallegos for some nine-years as a former prosecutor himself.) Maestas pointed out the “deal” Amanda was getting from Deputy District Attorney Emilio Chavez and did his best to get her excluded but the Judge mentioned “public interest” and said she must testify.
At that point, DDA Chavez and Defense Attorney Maestas agreed to stop the trial and forged a plea bargain. Evensen pleaded guilty. Sentencing will come later after the accused is subjected to a 60-day diagnostic test by the New Mexico prison system. Evensen, according to his attorney, didn’t want to confront the witness, his girlfriend, though Maestas believed he could win the case.
The case is on the Calendar for the Appeals Court, one of many cases on appeal from the 8th Judicial District.
Endemic Bigotry
Judge McElroy wondered aloud at the end of the day’s hearing if he should notify ICE (Immigration Customs Enforcement) about the defendant. “He’s a citizen,” said Maestas. Citizen? I should say so. I know his mother, who sat in the gallery. She’s from Taos Pueblo and his father, she assured me, is Ute.
Perhaps the good judge nodded off during the proceedings. It’s difficult for an Indian—a Native American—to get a fair trial in Taos. A former judge threw 32 Indians—Native Americans—in jail on “contempt” charges. Maybe one or two of those jailed wasn’t an Indian. But they got swept up because they were sitting with their friends from Taos Pueblo. The Supreme Court ran this judge off the bench, much to the public’s chagrin because he was known to draw attention to the DA’s “misconduct” and “misrepresentations,” whether to the District Court or the Court of Appeals and Supreme Court.”
Officer Montez and former Town of Taos Chief of Police Holgrefe are both running for Sheriff yet they both participated in and/or condoned the violation of the accused’s civil rights in the arrest and prosecution of Edward Evensen. Evensen, a Taos Pueblo/Ute from Colorado, the member of “a small family” surely had a drinking problem. He was seen earlier that fateful evening picking up butts in the Walmart Parking Lot. He might have been guilty of the act but he also deserved a fair trial.
But the sleaze oozes out from under the door at the DA’s office and it stains everyone who comes into contact with Donald and Emilio. You might think that the gangsters are held in the Taos Detention Center but I think you should look for them among the prosecutors. Maybe the Supreme Court will put the DA and the DDA on “Administrative Leave.”
You might ask how experienced cops and judges can believe a word Donald and Emilio say in court? Did all these characters cross their fingers behind their backs when they took the oath of office? We’re only asking.