Juror defends Ahumada decision
The foreman of the jury that acquitted Mayor Pat M. Ahumada Jr. of theft and other felony charges said Thursday that although the state’s retrial had been "a waste of taxpayers’ money, it was not a waste of time."
Foreman Johnny Simmons, a retired Brownsville businessman, also was upset about the negative reaction some people had upon learning that a unanimous jury Wednesday found Ahumada not guilty of theft, abuse of official capacity and misapplication of fiduciary property.
"We’re being treated like the jury was basically stupid," Simmons said of people who are asking why the jury didn’t find the mayor guilty.
The jury, made up of six men and six women, sided with Ahumada who maintains that he mistakenly deposited a city-issued $26,139 check in his business bank account in 2008. The check was intended to go to city vendor Tarsia Technical Industries Inc. of New York.
"The district attorney did not prove anything," said Simmons of Special Prosecutor Luis Saenz and Assistant District Attorney Michael Martinez, who Cameron County District Attorney Armando R. Villalobos selected to try the case.
Simmons said that the state prosecutors started off "pretty good" but then "scattered" about, bringing "totally irrelevant" issues into the case, which Simmons feels assisted the defense instead.
"They (prosecutors) didn’t have a grab on what they wanted to charge him with," Simmons said, agreeing with the defense’s argument that the state charged the mayor with three offenses to see which one caught on.
"The evidence wasn’t there," Simmons said, noting that jurors had strictly followed the detailed instructions of visiting Judge Robert C. Pate, who presided over the mayor’s retrial. Simmons said that jurors had left all personal feelings aside "no matter how we felt. Our personal opinion didn’t count."
Simmons said that the case should have never gone to trial, that it had been a waste of money but not a waste of time because the charges needed to be resolved.
"I don’t think he’s a crook," said Simmons who instead described Ahumada as a disorganized, brash and outspoken man, ho brushes people the wrong way and has checks more than a year old in his business files
In the first trial in October, the jury then deadlocked and Simmons said that this should have provided some insight to Villalobos about the weakness in the state’s case.
Simmons said that soon into deliberations, 10 of the 12 jurors had reached their decision and that the remaining two jurors promptly did also.
And, as the public debates the verdict, city officials weighed in on the verdict.
"I wish him well because it must have been an ordeal. The system, through a jury of his peers, decided he is innocent and it has to be respected," Commissioner Ricardo Longoria said. "Justice was on his side. Good for him. Good for Pat that nothing happened to him. He will fulfill his term — and then we’ll see what happens."
Commissioner Melissa Zamora said that the trial was certainly a distraction for the City Commission, "and now that it’s over, we need to cohesively focus on moving forward."
"City staff has worked to tighten policies and procedures so as to prevent such an incident from occurring in the future," Zamora said, referring to the continuing mystery of how the check got from the city Finance Department to Ahumada’s possession.
Commissioner Anthony Troiani noted that, "I think that the verdict speaks for itself."
