Arizona’s Miscarriage of Justice Regarding Sexual Exploitation / Molestation of a Minor Child / Dangerous Crimes Against Children
As we celebrate the Dr. Martin Luther King, it causes me to reflect one of my favorite quotes by the Reverend which is: “He who passively accepts evil is as much involved in it as he who helps to perpetrate it. He who accepts evil without protesting against it is really cooperating with it.”
As such, and in that Spirit and same vein, here is my open letter to the the Superior Court of Arizona Presiding Judge Joseph Welty, Criminal Presiding Judge Jennifer Green, and the Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct. I regret to see a miscarriage of justice performed in the case of the State of Arizona vs. George Aguirre. I recently learned from the Maricopa County Attorney’s office the discouraging news HONORABLE KERSTIN LEMAIRE dismissed a case against George Aguirre with prejudice. George Aguirre, the Defendant was presently charged with committing a series of sex offenses against his 14-year-old niece, Victim A. She is presently 15 years old. The charges include one count Aggravated Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation, one count Molestation of a Child, and one count Sexual Abuse, all felony offenses and Dangerous Crimes Against Children. He is also charged with one count misdemeanor Assault. There was a bench warrant on Mr. Aguirre issued (see here at the 1-minute mark) is now quashed though a Notice of Appeal was immediately filed: https://fb.watch/pxeXuneEea/?mibextid=tZ3DYY
12 January 2024
Presiding Judge Joseph Welty of Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County
Criminal Presiding Judge Jennifer Green of Superior Court of Arizona in Maricopa County
Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct Maricopa County
Subject: CR2022–001577–001 State of Arizona Vs. George Aguirre
Dear Arizona Commission on Judicial Conduct, Judge Jennifer Green, and Judge Joseph Welty:
We just learned from the Maricopa County Attorney’s office the discouraging news HONORABLE KERSTIN LEMAIRE dismissed a case against George Aguirre with prejudice. George Aguirre, the Defendant was presently charged with committing a series of sex offenses against his 14-year-old niece, Victim A. She is presently 15 years old. The charges include one count Aggravated Luring a Minor for Sexual Exploitation, one count Molestation of a Child, and one count Sexual Abuse, all felony offenses and Dangerous Crimes Against Children. He is also charged with one count misdemeanor Assault. There was a bench warrant on Mr. Aguirre issued (see here at the 1-minute mark): https://fb.watch/pxeXuneEea/?mibextid=tZ3DYY
Now the bench warrant has been quashed after a Notice of Appeal has been filed. Where is the justice in allowing a man who was charged with luring a minor child for sexual exploitation, molestation of a child, and sexual abuse? George Aguirre tampered with his ankle bracelet and fled the State of Arizona nowhere to be found.
Judge Lemaire declared a mistrial because she felt she prejudiced the case and she felt her instruction ruined the criminal defendant’s defense and declared a sua sponte which is incredibly rare.
The Criminal Defense attorney, Adam Feldman, asked for a mistrial with prejudice initially…but when the law says the defendant consents to the mistrial then double jeopardy does not attach. Feldman consented when the Court said they were going to declare a mistrial and then Feldman joined the court and consented.
Lemair only gave one paragraph in size after taking the full 90 days to issue a ruling and only gave one paragraph. Lemair doesn’t explain her reason why when all she simply wrote was:
“Although Defense Counsel did initially request a mistrial after the Court had sua sponte done so after numerous requests from the Defense. It was clear that in midst of a very contentious proceeding, Defense Counsel needed a moment to reflect how to proceed, especially in light of the fact that he did not have a client with him. Thus, the Court asked for the motion to be in writing. The Court agrees that it failed to make the requisite manifest necessity analysis and was not asked to by either party. Nonetheless, it failed to do so and to do so after the motion was filed would be improper.
IT IS ORDERED granting the motion and dismissing this matter with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED quashing the bench warrant issued in this matter.”
Criminal defense lawyer, Adam Feldman could have requested the same jury in this case as it is a right particular to the defendant — but he did not. In addition, the criminal defense lawyer requested 3 times a mistrial which is a clear situation where double jeopardy did not attach.
We now have to wait 45 days.
Feldman has already requested to withdraw and doesn’t want to appeal more than likely because he didn’t get paid and has already requested a public defender for George Aguirre. Furthermore, we were sitting behind Mr. Feldman (when George Aguirre cut his ankle bracelet and fled the scene), and we watched Feldman scroll through news stories on his laptop not paying attention to the proceedings of the Superior Court. He lost interest because we heard him tell the Court to the tune of: “I may as well sit here and do nothing because I am going to lose anyway.” Referring to his lost case.
All the transcripts have been ordered by the Maricopa County Attorney’s office and you will see strong evidence on why Feldman would have lost this case essentially because there was strong evidence why George Aguirre was charged with the charges set by Maricopa County Attorney’s office. Feldman’s whole case hinged on a phone number not being tied to his client when evidence debunked his entire claim. That is when Feldman aggressively Defense requested multiple mistrials throughout the course of the trial while his own client was fugitive to the case. I am not defending the defendent, but doesn’t the defendent have the right to request the same jury in this case as it is a right particular to the defendant? Feldman did not do that and in it’s place a miscarriage of justice was performed.
We hope what was meant for evil will turn around for good in the name of protecting our children.
