AMERIQUE:


A NOTE FROM THE EDITOR: It is the unspoken statistic, but it is as real as anything to do with the lingering U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan. According to the military, 1,800 American servicemen have killed themselves since the initial invasion of Baghdad. That is in addition to the more than 4,000 who died in battle. This week, families of the soldiers who committed suicide asked President Barack Obama to change the government policy of not forwarding letters of appreciation to mothers and fathers of these servicemen. By week's end, the White House had reversed the policy and agreed that such letters are needed, as well... - Eduardo Paz-Martinez, Editor of The Tribune

Wednesday, March 24, 2010

For The Falstaffian Mayor, An Up & Down Day on The Witness Stand...


By RON MEXICO
Staff Writer

BROWNSVILLE, TX - There was the stoic mayor on the witness stand, making his case and repeating his defense in a weird appearance born out of charges connected with the mayor's odd desposit of a $26,000 check belonging to someone else. There he was in court yesterday, telling jury members, "I didn’t take the check. I didn’t steal the check."

Mayor Pat Ahumada is charged with three felony offenses. He is expected to see the charges resolved in a jury rendering sometime today.

It was yet another high-profile Rio Grande Valley politician dressing up for trial. And there was Assistant District Attorney Michael Martinez prosecuting the popular mayor. Martinez wasted little time in painting Ahumada as a man with a perfect motive for cashing the City of Brownsville check belonging to a vendor: money woes. Prosecutors unfurled official documents indicating Ahumada awaited funds from a $70,000 home equity loan, a transaction delayed due to the mayor's delinquency on property taxes. Perhaps more comical, the prosecution noted Ahumada had spent about $6,000 of the $26,139 deposit.

But, as with all legal dramas, there were those rising for the defense.

Defense attorneys Ed Cyganiewicz and Star Jones listed a litany of financial arrangemnts the mayor had in effect with a variety of lenders. The mayor, they said, has lines of credit at several banks, overdraft protection, and family and friends with substantial financial resources. Ahumada served up an anecdote to substantiate his credibility, saying local attorney Ernesto Gamez had loaned him $40,000 on a “handshake.”

Cyganiewicz posed another scenario: “Somebody at City Hall made a mistake. The (bank) teller (who took the mayor’s deposit) made a mistake. The mayor made a mistake...but he’s the only one here.”

The annals of political weirdness are fat with stories where the facts seemingly point to unquestionable guilt. They are also fatter with stories where the real story never came out. A traditional police investigation will hit the usual buttons and obtain the usual information. This check story seems to be in the latter column. The mayor's claims of innocence sound plausible, and the prosecution's bent on using the barest of facts seems convenient, in essence a quick-easy courtroom victory, or hang him...and hang now.

This was no sinister plot. It is true that the mayor cannot claim he was not aware of fact No. 1: that the check was made to someone else. His financial problems are believable, but not damning. The matter about him spending $6,000 is an expected action. Most people will spend money they believe they have. So, did he steal the check (money)? Theft, it would seem, goes to him taking it willfully. Testimony indicates someone at City Hall gave him the check.

Prosecutors have made the case for Ahumada depositing the check. And they have presented witnesses to say that he did that. But theft? No. There is no evidence the mayor "stole" the check.

True justice: The money is forwarded to the city's vendor, if it hasn't been done already.

Political hay should not be part of this story. No one died, no one was hurt. A mistake was made and a mistake was rectified. Ahumada was never going to keep the money. City administrators would have been able to track payment of the check; that is, whose bank account it went into...
- 30 -
[EDITOR'S NOTE: A jury hearing this case has found Mayor Pat Ahumada not guilty of all charges...]

41 comments:

Anonymous said...

you think, Ron? you think the mayor is innocent? well, maybe he is then!

Don Pancho said...

Changin the topic, wow, the cutie from Rio Grande city sure looks nice.
But my dear Editor, why not a full shot??? You are letting the minds of your readers go into areas man has never been before.
I must admit your photographer has an eye for the very pretty gems in South Texas, I VOW to his accomplishments.

Don Pancho said...

Pat Ahumada is a guilty as sin, he knows it, I know it, the cantineras on 14th street know it, the owners of las cantinas know it, DP-M knows it, Juan Monotaya knows it, McAhle, of el Roci knows it, as does everyone knows it.
Pat, admitted like a real man, recognize the fact that you got caught bro, quit acting like an innocent person because we all know you are not.
I say, send him to Jail for a year, and 10 years probation, and quit wasting our time.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Well, Don Francisco, what exactly is he guilty of? Not "theft," so tell us, what charge should he be convicted on? Perhaps there is one. We just don't see it. However, we are aware that he could be found guilty. It's always 50-50 in a court of law, isn't it?... - Editor

Don Pancho said...

Taking a check, written to someone without the other parties permission is theft.
Plain and Simple.
Sorry Mr. Editor, I have to disagree, how can a 50 year old man, know that depositing a check under someone else's name without their authority wasn't wrong.
Don't blame it on anybody, not the cashier, not the bank, he iniated the crime, a crime he must pay.

Rosario said...

Misappriations of funds by a public servant is a serious a offense, you are not siding with the Mayor?? Mr. Editor, Puullease, you can do better than that, we don't need anymore crooked politicians. Democrats or Republicans.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Don Pancho: It's an intriguing case if you take the emotion out of it. The mayor has said he took the check thinking it was for him. How he could do that only he knows. The jury will weigh that and more and issue its ruling. Juries have been known to be sympathetic to this sort of mistake. (2.) We're not siding by the mayor at all. All we are saying is that "theft" seems to be at the heart of the case and, well, did he "steal" it? That's the rub. Misappropriation of funds? No, we fall on the City ultimately being able to see where the check went through its accounting department. At that point, the mayor would have had to return it. If he didn't, or couldn't, well then he would be subject to the theft charge. If he did return it, then there would be, as they say in basketball, no foul. The earlier "hung jury" is a consideration, isn't it?... - Editor

Anonymous said...

My favorite blog defending the Mayor of Brownsville, Patrick, you need a shot of wine immidiately.
There is more to wearing a hat, and then behaving like billy the kid.
Come my lad, there are places in town that serve good tasting wine.
And after awhile you will agree that using someone elses property with their consent is wrong, plain wrong, what's the matter with you my good man???????

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Anon: We are not defending the mayor, simply raising some points. The jury will decide, not us. In the larger scheme of things flailing at this ever-ragged society, this is small potatoes. It is, and it is... - Editor

Don Pancho said...

We will wait for the Verdict of the jury, although, I must confess that things don't look good for him.
If I was working for a city, I would double check with the finance dept. and made sure, whenever, I would get extra money on my check that the bookeeping was done properly.
Some people think they can get away with anything. $26.000 dollars is a lot of money, I know of some people that have gone to prison for less than that.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Well, yes. It is unsophisticated South Texas, so anything can happen with a jury of your peers. What is clear to us is this: the money is back in the hands of the city (or the vendor, we would presume). Ahumada did not leave the country. He has stood two trials. Yes, who knows what the verdict will be. All we say is: be a bit intellectual about it. Grabbing for the easy-reach opinion falls prey to the RGV mentality. We think there is enough doubt about the mayor's motive, but it is not outright, calculated theft... - Editor

Anonymous said...

hey, what if he gets off? Wow!

Anonymous said...

Patrick, for Christ sake, why are you bashing the Valley again?? unsophisticated, intellectually challenged, bad eating habbits, big beer drinkers, overweight people, bad writing skills, hey this is the South, so we didn't go to Eastern Schools, and there is lot of things done here, that are done differently in other areas of the country, but wrong is wrong, and that my fellow man would be wrong in New York just like here in Texas.
And you might not beleive this ,some of us want to change the culture, baby steps at a time.

Anonymous said...

Get off! You crazy, anon. We cannot loose this one, man.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Anon (1.) It's not "bashing" the Valley when one is simply making true observations. What, we should ignore such things? For what winning purpose? Yes, every region has its signature deficiencies. The RGV does, as well. Are you upset because those deficiencies are here, or because we noted them? Explain yourself. Anon (2.): The mayor has a 50-50 chance of getting off, yes. The jury will gauge the evidence and render its decision. Who's Mayor Pro-Tem in Brownsville anyway?... -Editor

Anonymous said...

It is NOT GUILTY! Hijos. Now what, patrick?

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Now, well, now you go on, beating against the current, chasing the green light... - Editor

Anonymous said...

Patrick, you raised enough doubt in your postings, man. it was right-on. you kno your stuff. I'm impressed.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Well, there seemed to be a few holes in the case, and, to a jury, sometimes that's all it takes to raise doubts... - Editor

Don Pancho said...

Pero como diablos este bueno para nada se escapo??? A Mayor that is more concern about dogs, than about the welfare of the citizenry.
They should have moved the trial to Houston or Kerville, where people think a little more rational.
Typical Brownsville crowd, no wonder, the city is littered with used tire shops, greasy restaurant that sell nothing, but grease, and the cantinas in 14th street.
And now a Mayor, that accidentally, deposited over $26.000 and said it was a mistake.
And I thought Cameron County was corrupted, shame on the jury, shame on you, see how you sleep tonight or God forbid you ever make a mistake, like that and see how much compassion a jury is going to have on you.(Just hope I am not a juror)

Don Pancho said...

What is this?????? Don Patricio, lately you have been throwing knock out punches with your words, to, too many of my good wine drinking buddies, including myself and I can't let you get away with this stuff, madre, and just what exactly do you mean by the "unsophisticated Valley" comment.
You are compairing good hard working people to some crazy jury of 12, that don't know the difference between right and wrong.
I hope you are "NOT" drinking on the job, because you have critize the LRGV on just about everything.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Don Pancho, Don Pancho: (1.) The mayor was tried by a jury of his peers and at the hand of the supposedly competent District Attorney's office. The verdict was NOT GUILTY and that's that. It's the legal system we have, sir. (2.) We have addressed the "unsophisticated' reference in the comments section of the post above this one. (3.) We absolutely do not criticize everything about the RGV. We don't have enough time in the day to tackle that one. But do know that we're more happy than we are disappointed about our life here. Lighten up a bit... - Editor

Anonymous said...

Just read, that some of your writers are attending some gala dance or event somewhere in Brownsville.
I thought Ron Mexico was a married man or thats what he said on an earlir post.
You mean the wife is going to allowing to attend a dinner and dance with the cow puncher from the Herald??? She must not be from here>
Here in Texas, when a man commits to a woman, he better mean it, doulbe timing women in Texas is a no-no, you might want to pass it on to Mr. Mexico.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

ANON: You're behind the curve, Ace. A note was posted on El Rocinante signed by me saying Ron Mexico has declined the invitation to party with The Herald's Emma Perez-Trevino. He has taken a wife and, as he put it, "can no longer come out to play." Our writers uphold the highest of standards and morals. We are also led to believe that DP-M will not be attending, either. The Town Gala will have to go on without us... - Editor

Anonymous said...

I just read the posting on the Valley Morning Star about the Brownsville Mayor innocent verdict, having been on a jury pool myself not once but several instances, at times it is hard for a jury to stay around for more than 3 days.
Sometimes, just to go back to your routine, you will do something you will have second thoughts at a later time. If the jury was ordered to stay until they reached a verdict, I guess that explains the outcome.
Lastly, my only comment is: disappointment.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

So true, Anon. What's the pay for sitting on a district court jury these days - $6 a day? Still, serving on a jury can never be solely for money. It's the price you pay for as honest a system as can be fashioned. We may yet, however, return to the Dark Ages... - Editor

Anonymous said...

Well, Don Francisco, what exactly is he guilty of?

-The Mayor stole Don Francisco's movida (the movida was already two timing him anyway).

-The Mayor stole Ernie's Mayorship (but nobody wanted Ernie anyway).

-The Mayor stole attention from Ruben and Ernie (people still do not want Ernie nor Ruben).

-The Mayor stole attention from Wood and Trevino (people still ask "who is the lesser of these four evils"?

Anonymous said...

Puullease, you can do better than that, we don't need anymore crooked politicians. Democrats or Republicans.



THEN LET'S NOT VOTE FOR Ernie Hdz. NOR Eddie Treviño.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Anon: The mayor is apparently not guilty of anything to do with the $26,0000 check. (2.) You should not vote for Hernandez, nor Trevino, nor Vote, nor Cascos.... - Editor

Don Pancho said...

Once a crook always a crook, and as much as I disaree with the outcome of the trial. I want to wish the Mayor well and recognize the juries verdict. As far as stealing my Movida, let me assure Anony there are women who have class and hang around with classy people.
(Even if the Editor of this blog, who constantly throws body punches to the locals and doesn't agree with me many a times. We do have people with class )
We are forgiving people and respect the editor's opinion.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Don Pancho, we will make this as clear as we can. Our comment about the mayor went to the verdict. He was acquitted, which means the jury decided he was not guilty. Whether he was or not is now moot. (2.) We're not in any way shape or form interested in anyone's "movida," as we find that local sport completely sickening. (3.) You again blast us for our social observations, yet you're complaint goes to our writing about it - not that we brought it to town. See, it's been here for generations. We have yet to see an editorial (guest, or otherwise) in the local newspaper damning the "movida," the corruption, the wife-beating, the deadbeat dads, the crippling beer addictions, the failure to show advancement as, say, MacAllen has progressed. Things should be said, do you not agree? To remain silent is to enable; that is, to allow it to continue. Yeah, we're open to being criticized for caring, but, hey, we do, perhaps more than you would imagine... - Editor

Don pancho said...

I reserve the right, to give you a rebuttal at a later time. This is far from over.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Super. As DP-M likes to say when the newsroom staff rebels, "Have at it. The smoking lamp is on." We welcome your thoughts, absolutely... - Editor

Anonymous said...

So what happen to Don Pancho??? Did you set him straight, he sure got quiet after your rebuttal.
OR did you banned him from the forum, I have noticed the exchanges between you and him at times get contentious.
Just wondering, he normally has something to say. Oh I just remember, Eddie Trevenio is going to be in San Benito, at Vickies rest. for a rally.
Are your reporters planning on attending???

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Who knows what happened to Don Pancho. He was not banned. And he did promise to get back to us on something or another. Perhaps he's busy doing research. WHEN is the Trevino rally in San Benito?... - Editor

Anonymous said...

It is in the Valley Morning Star in todays paper, someone is riding a horse on the picture of the advertisement. I didn't know Eddie Trevino could ride horses.
It is Saturday March 27th at 3:oo pm.
It's a guy riding a horse with some type of blanket, and rider is wearing shirt that looks like the American flag.
Vickis Rest. is on Williams Road. At San Benito.
Is the tribune going to send someone to cover the event? The ad says people can take a picture with the horse and meet the candidate.
I bet it is going to be interesting.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

It is wildly possible that the horse will end up being the attraction, don't you think? Will Trevino speak to the issues, or is this another of those fajita burn-outs?...- Editor

Anonymous said...

They usually speak about their platforms, I don't think too many poeple ask questions when they are eating.
I know Tara Rios had a big event at la Placita in Harlingen, and she spoked about some issues.
I thought you might want to know, since you guys are fair and balance on your editorials.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Thank you for that. Sounds like another evening on the Chicken Leg Circuit. What ever became of Tara Rios?... - Editor

Anonymous said...

I guess I spoke to soon, I see your nemesis woke up, or put the wine down at the garden, what is he calling you out on???
Well, I will be at the rally, I don't know what happen to Tara, she wasn't to bad looking I met her and her entourage at a Valentines dance in Harlingen. John Wood and his wife were there also
Tara looked enticing. Oh well, I think she was spoken for.

Patrick Alcatraz said...

Oh, Don Pancho's been okay. He fluuters his feathers, but his words are still harmless. He really hasn't taken us to task on anything, at least from the standpoint of our observations being wrong... - Editor