When All Else Fails...

Martin Goldberg, the attorney for convicted killer, Jose Muniz made some comments recently, though brief, that have evoked quite a bit of emotion among Justice for Junior supporters, myself included and rightfully so. Among the comments he recently made to PIX11, he informed the public of a letter written by Jose that is to be read at his sentencing. He describes the contents of the letter as means to explain why the attacked happened and to set the record straight. This immediately has sparked countless inquiries. If these are details Jose was so eager to share, why didn’t he testify at his own trial? We know the generic response...the fifth amendment, but if we’re to believe that this letter holds any new revelations, then why wait until now? What vindication will come out of it and exactly why set the record straight now and not when it would’ve served to exonerate him? 

That could be a rhetorical question, but I’m going to answer it with my own opinion. It is because the letter is only another tactic to lessen the blow of sentencing. When that letter is read, its contents will not face the scrutiny of cross-examination it would have faced had they been revealed during the trial. It makes me wonder, are the rest of the comments Mr. Goldberg made an indication of what to expect in Jose’s letter? 

Judging from Mr. Goldberg’s latest comments, it would appear he is still intent on trying to cast doubts on the image of Junior that has been portrayed from the very moment this horrific tragedy went viral. He seems to imply the guilty verdict would’ve been unobtainable had Jr’s image been one of a gang member being slaughtered by a rival gang. However, what I find peculiar and amusing is he says these things while admitting Jr’s death was an unjust killing. How does that work? If a defense attorney can acknowledge a death is an unjust killing, then how can he suggest the jury ignored evidence when they so obviously concluded the same as him? I find it just as entertaining that he threw a stone at the jury suggesting they convicted the killers based who they are and who they THOUGHT Jr was. Pot meet kettle? He's defending his client and vilifying the victim based on who HE and his client thought Jr was too. Matter of fact, the entire vicious act happened because of who the Trinitarios THOUGHT Jr was...a rival gang member. Their belief he was a member of Sunset, who they were on the hunt for, was never substantiated but instead debunked when NONE of the Trinitarios involved in Jr's murder could pinpoint exactly who it was they THOUGHT they had just killed. 

As if it's not enough to vilify the victim, but apparently, its necessary to deflect from his client’s culpability by pissing and moaning about how Kevin Alvarez and Michael Sosa Reyes received great leniency for their testimony. Granted, none of us wanted them to get off as easy as they did, but there’s no denying they provided some very imperative testimony that laid the foundation for the DA’s case. And with Kevin, his reasoning for finding Kevin’s punishment as too lenient certainly has merit...but he mischaracterized Sosa’s role in the attack by wrongly saying Sosa told them to “drag him[Jr out], there’s cameras’ as if to suggest Sosa gave a direct order for Jr to be dragged out so he could be killed. Those were not the words Sosa said. The video evidence is there for anybody to see and listen to without having to attend the trial. Sosa’s words were “Saca los tigres da ahi, ay camaras.” Translation: Get those GUYS(los tigres a slang term for a guy from the streets) out of there...there’s cameras and if Jose Muñiz had simply heeded Sosa’s warning, maybe JUST MAYBE, Jose wouldn’t be sitting in a jail cell awaiting his sentencing. 

Trust me, most Justice for Junior supporters get it. We know it is Mr. Goldberg’s job to defend his client. By the same merit, however, just as we can acknowledge this, we can also criticize it. With that criticism its very evident that at this point in the game, Jose Muñiz’s attorney knows the question is no longer whether or not his client is “guilty or not guilty,” but instead the question has become HOW LONG in reference to the sentencing that Jose awaits. That is the task at hand for Mr. Golberg and he is pulling NO punches, as many defense attorneys seldom do. If the average Joe can see right through these tactics, I’m confident an esteemed and honorable judge can do the same.