What follows is the final installment in the Nancy Hollebeke blog. This brings the saga full circle and to the final official word of the Court in that case. In the end what finally happened was that, after all the excuses, denials, cross-accusations of Jaime Esparza and all the taxpayer money spent by Jaime Esparza defending his actions in this case in the Court of Inquiry and Federal Court, Nancy Hollebeke was ultimately fully vindicated and emerges totally triumphant, to-wit:
1. Brief Recap: Remember, Nancy Hollebeke accused two El Paso Police Officers of sexually assaulting her (the father of one of them still works and worked for the DA’s office as an investigator at all the crucial times decisions were made in her case by the DA’s office but Jaime Esparza still refused to disqualify himself from the case and stated he did NOT have a conflict of interest). Jaime Esparza had Nancy thrown in jail and prosecuted her for Filing a False Police Report against the two Police Officers.
Historic Note: Years ago, when Number Two Police Officer in the El Paso Police Dept., George DeAngelis, brought forth allegations of drug cartel infiltration of the Police Department and corruption, Jaime Esparza, rather than investigating the alleged corruption, had him, George DeAngelis, the whistleblower, arrested and indicted. Are we seeing a pattern here?
2. In the Hollebeke case there was a horrendous interrogation of Ms. Hollebeke that was videotaped. El Paso Police Officer Brigette Ballew conducted this “interview” and Assistant DA’s Karen Shook Larose and Penny Hamilton were hiding behind a one-way mirror feeding Ballew questions through headphones to ask Nancy in an effort to break down her story. Judge Stephen Ables of Kerrville, TX, who presided over the Court of Inquiry was outraged by this videotape.
DA Jaime Esparza personally signed the Motion to Dismiss the case of Filing a False Police Report that he had originally filed against Nancy Hollebeke.
3. On March 22, 2007, at 8:17 a.m. I filed my First Amended Motion to Expunge Records in the Nancy Hollebeke False Report case in a new lawsuit in the 171st Judicial District Court in cause number: 2007-782. In it, it is alleged that, my client, Nancy Hollebeke, was charged with Filing a False Police Report without probable cause or reasonable suspicion to do so; that we were prepared to prove, at the expunction hearing, by calling the following witnesses: El Paso County District Attorney Jaime Esparza, other members of his office (both past and present), El Paso Police Officers, members of the judiciary, and others, that Nancy Hollebeke should never have been charged or arrested at all and that she was set up from the very beginning.
Attached to this Motion to Expunge, as Exhibit “A”, was a sworn affidavit from former Assistant District Attorney and current El Paso Attorney Roger Montoya wherein he stated that: His supervisor at the time, El Paso County Attorney Penny Hamilton (Chief of the Rape Unit) told him, before the videotaped “interview” of Nancy Hollebeke conducted by Brigette Ballew (assisted by ADA’s Penny Hamilton and Karen Shook Larose) was ever even begun, that, words to the effect of: Don’t worry or don’t get excited, it’s not going anywhere”. The “it” that Penny Hamilton was referring to that was not going anywhere was Nancy Hollebeke’s allegation of sexual assault against the two El Paso Police Officers. Mr. Montoya said, in his affidavit, that he took Ms. Hamilton’s comments to mean that the case (her allegations against them) was not going to be prosecuted. Again, this was before the “interview” had even begun; ie-before the allegations had been fully investigated. Roger Montoya continues: “Ms. Hamilton then stated words to the effect that she didn’t have a lot of time to talk because Jaime Esparza was with her and they were still working on the case.”
On March 27-28, 2007, the El Paso County Attorney’s Office, representing the District Attorney’s Office, (the Respondent), in this Motion to Expunge Records that I filed in Nancy’s case, filed a document entitled: “Answer to Petition for Expunction”. In it, they stated the following: “A review of our records and applicable law leads the Respondent to conclude that Petitioner (Nancy Hollebeke) is entitled to expunction of records relating to cause number: 2003OCO2904 (the Filing of a False Police Report charge filed against her), as alleged in the petition.
Now, remember what it was that was alleged in the petition: See first full paragraph in item number 3 above: that she, Nancy Hollebeke, was charged with Filing A False Police Report without probable cause or reasonable suspicion to do so, that she should never have been charged or arrested at all and that she was set up from the very beginning!
On March 28, 2007 an Order Expunging the Records was filed in this case. On the signature page the El Paso County Attorney’s Office, again, representing the District Attorney’s Office in this case, signed off that they were Not Opposed to the expunction. The Presiding Judge of the 171st Judicial District Court also signed the Order Expunging Records and it was then filed and is now a final order.
What has Esparza learned with all his years of experience (almost 16 now) as DA? How to protect his employees’ relatives? How to arrest the people reporting corruption but not investigate the corruption itself so it blossoms into something much bigger and flourishes? How to hold onto his job?
So, the questions voters need to ask are: Do we want a DA who sets people up? Do we want a DA who uses the power of his office to protect his employees’ relatives? Do we want a DA who, instead of investigating corruption, throws the people who report corruption in jail?
If you answered NO to any of the questions your course is clear. Vote Esparza out of office now. Vote for change on March 4, 2008. Vote for Theresa Caballero for District Attorney. Remember check place # 1 in the DA category.
Remember early voting begins on February 19, 2008!