The detective is a human piece of trash. Al Marquez. He didn't testify and for good reason. He would have been eaten alive on cross examination. He did testify in the hearing prior to his 3rd trial and was evicerated by the defense attorney.
@@muchsunshine6037 Being bullied? coerced? made to agree to false statements through threats? The witness to the shooting was also threatened in the exact same way. What Daniel "confessed" to doesn't even match the facts at the crime scene lol.
@@GoogleUser-tn2tz conflict of interest, but sometimes the courts would ignore those lol.. I've seen it happen before that a Crown and Defence who were married or common law partners (I can't remember) were both working on a Murder Trial here at Toronto, Canada.
She pretty much told tbe jury "look, we dont have a strong case soooooo why dont you make a judgment of guilty with NO EVIDENCE and convict him off pure emotions"..? Huh? TFUK
Yeah. You're right there. I understand he rejected a plea deal. They should have dropped the charges, but had to save face somehow. So they went into what they knew was a sure loser.
The fact that he said not to that deal that was offered says two things one the prosecution knew they were in hot water and two he is really innocent because he would have not went back to prison with the deal they tried to offer him
That's perverse! If the public prosecutor has concerns, then she must withdraw the charges. But it seems to me that in the USA it is the case that the public prosecutor wants a conviction at all costs. Even if he/she is convinced that the person is innocent. Things are different in Germany, where the charges are dropped in case of doubt. Of course my impression could be wrong, my only sources are CZcams videos :D
Sorry if I was on a jury I HAVE TO HAVE physical evidence or the case is not beyond a shadow of a doubt it just can't be u need evidence and they just had hear say therefore it's a dismissed case.... if ur in the jury u can't convict someone by pure emotion or "how u feel" which is what the prosecutor suggest that's just wrong it's based on HARD evidence
Well then you'd never be allowed on a jury. There are several types of evidence, and a juror needs to give weight to each type. Many crimes don't have physical evidence, but have a ton of circumstantial evidence. Other crimes may have have witness testimony, or in this case, a confession.
@@muchsunshine6037 Unfortunately, eyewitness testimony is the worst, most unreliable type of evidence there is. And there was no "confession" in this case. There was someone saying the defendant confessed. That was it. And that person recanted, and said he was lying at the time. No one in their right mind could possibly convict under those circumstances. A "confession" is on tape, usually in a police interrogation room. This was nothing but hearsay.
Det. Marquez should be on trial. Thank god a wrongfully accused man was proven innocent. Maybe if the state did their job and put half the effort they did into going after Daniel, Into finding the real killer we would have justice for the victims.
Crazy how all over the place she is with this story. Guess that was her tactic since she didn’t have much and would have been done in 2 mins ha. She had to make it confusing and drawn out same things over and over and I guarentee every single juror was thinking “finish the fuc$&ing story man!! ( fear and loathing in los Vegas quote lol
She really had no skin in the game. That's why she lost and it's why she couldn't have won. She's arguing this thing that she is 1x2x3x above. She is removed from it, aliased from the source, abstracted right out of the picture. She's playing a video game here. She's when you have to play as Luigi. She was arguing something she didn't know about and couldn't possibly care about in a million lives.
But they had 0 hard evidence a jury can't decide a person's fate based on emotion is he innocent idk but this is a dismissal because u can't prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt and the lack of evidence does leave a tad of doubt
What would John M gain from any of this he lost thousands of his own dollars because his wife’s children are related to the defendant so he has nothing at all to gain who cares he gave him a job I would have too because he wouldn’t be able to hold a job because of the time he spent in prison a lot of inmates come out and end up on social security because they are institutionalized. We give money insurance and food stamps every month to convicted criminals because they did wrong but a working single mother looses insurance for her children because she makes 10$ an hour don’t ask about food stamps because she never qualified has no rent assistance but convicted criminals get free rent this system is so broken this case proves how screwed up our government is
My god, being a prosecutor must be the only way you go, when you can barely pass the exam. She says: "Lets go thru this, and lets do it using common sense!". Everyone knows common sense is not used in courtrooms. The law is the law, not common sense.
It generally is. If you went to a top law school and you got good grades, you are funneled into one of the top, extremely high-paying firms (starting salary is in the neighborhood of $250k with bonus). The prosecutors generally went to the mediocre law schools, and were the mediocre students at best. Don't get me wrong - many of them are great people. And some of them are really smart. I've worked with, and respected, many prosecutors. But as a whole, you're generally not going to see any Yale grads prosecuting cases at the state level (maybe at the federal level because that is a funnel to the bench).
Actually, yes you bring your common sense to the courtroom, judges even tell juries to bring their common sense, especially in circumstantial evidence cases where there is no direct evidence you have to use your common sense. However, what SHE is saying makes absolutely no sense... why is someone still guilty after the only person who said they did it, ends up confessing that they lied and made up the story just cause he was scared the cops were going to go after him. There is no other evidence except for what his cousin said and he confessed it was a lie.
Just heard about this case. I'm getting addicted to all these cases. He's a different man now. The past catched up on him. I'm sure after all this time he didn't think it would come back to haunt him. I think he did it.
They weren't allowed to talk about his history but if you look deeper into it, he had a 1st trial with a hung jury back in the 90's and then a conviction for which he was in jail for 18 years. He was then let out on bail because they never had any evidence other than what his cousin David said. This is his 3rd trial.
Why do you think he did it? There is literally no evidence except for what his cousin said, which his cousin even admitted was false, that he was just puttin blame on anyone randomly cause the cops were threatening him. It just happened to be Daniel's name who he chose to blurt out. In fact, theres evidence that he didnt do it, and no evidence that he did.
Something is off in this case . I watched everything I could on this case and read and came in thinking this man might truly be innocent but thinking objectively and applying common sense this lady hit it out of the ballpark and again I wanted him to be innocent. Something is terribly wrong and a guilty man just may escape justice. Imagine if the 2 victims were your family and go back and watch everything on this case and watch the not guilty verdict and you can't help but to think something is wrong way off in this verdict. This the only time I ever thought that someone might have been paid and jury tampering may have happened. SMH.
Excellent Rebuttal by this woman! Long live "Common Sense and Logical Reasoning" She couldn't of made it anymore CLEARER than she did. Daniel Villegas IS GUILTY.
Elva Beltran she’s a horrible liar. You don’t know the things she lied about while Daniel was out on bail. She lied so bad about stuff. She’s a scary woman. Daniel was exonerated. The jury saw through her
That's weird. I just watched the verdict, and he was found not guilty. That means he is, in fact, not guilty. Because in our system, the jury determined guilt or innocence. Not some rando named Elva on the internet comment boards...
Glad I found this video, and yes I also believe Daniel is guilty without even seeing this video. .. First video I saw obviously was the not guilty crap as recommended by CZcams. CZcams doesn't realise i don't jump to conclusions ever, it's one of my many rules in a system built upon rules within rules I follow constantly which helps to follow other rules flawlessly.
Huh lol did you see all the evidence? Seems like you didnt lol or else you would know that there was absolutely no evidence except for his cousin saying he did it, which then he ended up confessing it had been a lie. that he was just scared cops were gonna pin it on him, so he put it all on his cousin. He just came up with a random name too, if it wouldnt have been Daniel, he would have named a different name, Daniel's was just the first one he came up with.
Many of you please stop with the foolish comments about the prosecution woman. Also it's not that she's smart it's that many of you are dunce, she's using logic like I did from the start, I had Daniel guilty from watching the not guilty video. That's the illogical part to this whole comment which is why he's guilty. Read this again and watch the case over.
Where are the detectives?? They should be on the witness stand if they know for fact that this man is guilty .
The detective is a human piece of trash. Al Marquez. He didn't testify and for good reason. He would have been eaten alive on cross examination. He did testify in the hearing prior to his 3rd trial and was evicerated by the defense attorney.
That prosecutors talked to the jury like they were children. She talked down to them.
And used "appeal to emotion" which is a sign they know they don't have a solid case.
@@14598175 I disagree. The defense to his confessions are ridiculous. The jury got it wrong in my opinion.
@@muchsunshine6037 Being bullied? coerced? made to agree to false statements through threats? The witness to the shooting was also threatened in the exact same way. What Daniel "confessed" to doesn't even match the facts at the crime scene lol.
@@coryCuc I agree
Imagine having the prosecutor as a wife, u will never be right.
Imagine a prosecutor and defence counsel married together, and they're both assigned a murder trial.
@@user-cz9rq3xf5y Not gonna happen, though. Conflict of something-something, I dunno.
@@GoogleUser-tn2tz conflict of interest, but sometimes the courts would ignore those lol.. I've seen it happen before that a Crown and Defence who were married or common law partners (I can't remember) were both working on a Murder Trial here at Toronto, Canada.
@@user-cz9rq3xf5y What case? I've searched and I can't find it. No judge would allow that.
@@user-cz9rq3xf5y that's Canada. You have no freedom there. Your PM is the laughing stock on the world trade
I feel that she demeans Daniels family and their love for a family member.
She pretty much told tbe jury "look, we dont have a strong case soooooo why dont you make a judgment of guilty with NO EVIDENCE and convict him off pure emotions"..? Huh? TFUK
{504} Little Puppet {504} it stinks because it’s her job. She has to do it. Even if she doesn’t believe it herself
It works in most cases.Just watch other cases on this channel.
So victim's family is crying, so let's lock him up to appease them even though there is no physical evidence
She sure did not connect with the jury! She did talk down to them. Bad! Bad! Bad!
Repeating "It makes no sense" doesn't work. In fact *that* makes no sense.
Prosecutor was a joke...she knew she was done.
Yeah. You're right there. I understand he rejected a plea deal. They should have dropped the charges, but had to save face somehow. So they went into what they knew was a sure loser.
The prosecuter wasn't a joke because jokes are entertaining.
The fact that he said not to that deal that was offered says two things one the prosecution knew they were in hot water and two he is really innocent because he would have not went back to prison with the deal they tried to offer him
funny how she thinks all cops are upstanding, law abiding, honest cops..... time n time gain cops hve proven themselves to be anything but!
That's perverse! If the public prosecutor has concerns, then she must withdraw the charges. But it seems to me that in the USA it is the case that the public prosecutor wants a conviction at all costs. Even if he/she is convinced that the person is innocent. Things are different in Germany, where the charges are dropped in case of doubt.
Of course my impression could be wrong, my only sources are CZcams videos :D
Sorry if I was on a jury I HAVE TO HAVE physical evidence or the case is not beyond a shadow of a doubt it just can't be u need evidence and they just had hear say therefore it's a dismissed case.... if ur in the jury u can't convict someone by pure emotion or "how u feel" which is what the prosecutor suggest that's just wrong it's based on HARD evidence
Well then you'd never be allowed on a jury.
There are several types of evidence, and a juror needs to give weight to each type.
Many crimes don't have physical evidence, but have a ton of circumstantial evidence. Other crimes may have have witness testimony, or in this case, a confession.
@@muchsunshine6037 Unfortunately, eyewitness testimony is the worst, most unreliable type of evidence there is. And there was no "confession" in this case. There was someone saying the defendant confessed. That was it. And that person recanted, and said he was lying at the time. No one in their right mind could possibly convict under those circumstances. A "confession" is on tape, usually in a police interrogation room. This was nothing but hearsay.
prosecution should be locked up
Det. Marquez should be on trial.
Thank god a wrongfully accused man was proven innocent.
Maybe if the state did their job and put half the effort they did into going after Daniel, Into finding the real killer we would have justice for the victims.
Crazy how all over the place she is with this story. Guess that was her tactic since she didn’t have much and would have been done in 2 mins ha. She had to make it confusing and drawn out same things over and over and I guarentee every single juror was thinking “finish the fuc$&ing story man!! ( fear and loathing in los Vegas quote lol
What happens? What about the glands?
She really had no skin in the game. That's why she lost and it's why she couldn't have won. She's arguing this thing that she is 1x2x3x above. She is removed from it, aliased from the source, abstracted right out of the picture. She's playing a video game here. She's when you have to play as Luigi. She was arguing something she didn't know about and couldn't possibly care about in a million lives.
As This Prosecutor States The Facts, The JUDGE Looks Quite Shaken, Hmmmm
Yeah the judge looks paid off
I Cant Say That Is , But This Whole Trial Is Shady
I wouldn't be surprised if somehow some of the jury was rigged
I Bet You Are Right, Cartel Carries A Big Stick
But they had 0 hard evidence a jury can't decide a person's fate based on emotion is he innocent idk but this is a dismissal because u can't prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt and the lack of evidence does leave a tad of doubt
Plus there is no room for common sense here only evidence and proof should be considered to prosecute someone
She used the Christoper Darden "circus" statements at the end.
what a chaos story.
just name the facts and make the story interesting
this let me fall asleep...
So how did it
Make a slot of since because that’s what detectives due
What would John M gain from any of this he lost thousands of his own dollars because his wife’s children are related to the defendant so he has nothing at all to gain who cares he gave him a job I would have too because he wouldn’t be able to hold a job because of the time he spent in prison a lot of inmates come out and end up on social security because they are institutionalized. We give money insurance and food stamps every month to convicted criminals because they did wrong but a working single mother looses insurance for her children because she makes 10$ an hour don’t ask about food stamps because she never qualified has no rent assistance but convicted criminals get free rent this system is so broken this case proves how screwed up our government is
My god, being a prosecutor must be the only way you go, when you can barely pass the exam. She says: "Lets go thru this, and lets do it using common sense!".
Everyone knows common sense is not used in courtrooms. The law is the law, not common sense.
It generally is. If you went to a top law school and you got good grades, you are funneled into one of the top, extremely high-paying firms (starting salary is in the neighborhood of $250k with bonus). The prosecutors generally went to the mediocre law schools, and were the mediocre students at best. Don't get me wrong - many of them are great people. And some of them are really smart. I've worked with, and respected, many prosecutors. But as a whole, you're generally not going to see any Yale grads prosecuting cases at the state level (maybe at the federal level because that is a funnel to the bench).
Actually, yes you bring your common sense to the courtroom, judges even tell juries to bring their common sense, especially in circumstantial evidence cases where there is no direct evidence you have to use your common sense. However, what SHE is saying makes absolutely no sense... why is someone still guilty after the only person who said they did it, ends up confessing that they lied and made up the story just cause he was scared the cops were going to go after him. There is no other evidence except for what his cousin said and he confessed it was a lie.
This prosecutor is a witch!!!🤬
There are false witnesses.
I'm sure I have seen the prosecutor in a film on porn hub.
25:59 think of the GTA V game, *busted* then the playstation and tv blows up. No return.
Very unlikable prosecutor
Just heard about this case. I'm getting addicted to all these cases. He's a different man now. The past catched up on him. I'm sure after all this time he didn't think it would come back to haunt him. I think he did it.
They weren't allowed to talk about his history but if you look deeper into it, he had a 1st trial with a hung jury back in the 90's and then a conviction for which he was in jail for 18 years. He was then let out on bail because they never had any evidence other than what his cousin David said. This is his 3rd trial.
Think again! Daniel turned down three different plea deals. Why? Because he is innocent and wanted to prove it.
Why do you think he did it? There is literally no evidence except for what his cousin said, which his cousin even admitted was false, that he was just puttin blame on anyone randomly cause the cops were threatening him. It just happened to be Daniel's name who he chose to blurt out. In fact, theres evidence that he didnt do it, and no evidence that he did.
She's absolutely right. The defense about the cousin makes no sense.
Something is off in this case . I watched everything I could on this case and read and came in thinking this man might truly be innocent but thinking objectively and applying common sense this lady hit it out of the ballpark and again I wanted him to be innocent. Something is terribly wrong and a guilty man just may escape justice. Imagine if the 2 victims were your family and go back and watch everything on this case and watch the not guilty verdict and you can't help but to think something is wrong way off in this verdict. This the only time I ever thought that someone might have been paid and jury tampering may have happened. SMH.
Damn she's elite
Yes she is
danny ochoa I don’t like her. Believe she is talking down to jury
Totally!
@@KrisWolf4 that trial was totally fixed
@@dannyochoa8167 everyone has the right to their opinion. I was merely stating mine. Thank you for stating yours. Have a nice day!
Damn Too Bad He Will Walk Away
Excellent Rebuttal by this woman! Long live "Common Sense and Logical Reasoning" She couldn't of made it anymore CLEARER than she did. Daniel Villegas IS GUILTY.
Elva Beltran she’s a horrible liar. You don’t know the things she lied about while Daniel was out on bail. She lied so bad about stuff. She’s a scary woman. Daniel was exonerated. The jury saw through her
Guilty people get off all the time fool. The defenses case was a joke. This guy was guilty and he walked, it happens.
That's weird. I just watched the verdict, and he was found not guilty. That means he is, in fact, not guilty. Because in our system, the jury determined guilt or innocence. Not some rando named Elva on the internet comment boards...
Glad I found this video, and yes I also believe Daniel is guilty without even seeing this video. ..
First video I saw obviously was the not guilty crap as recommended by CZcams.
CZcams doesn't realise i don't jump to conclusions ever, it's one of my many rules in a system built upon rules within rules I follow constantly which helps to follow other rules flawlessly.
Guess what who asked
Huh lol did you see all the evidence? Seems like you didnt lol or else you would know that there was absolutely no evidence except for his cousin saying he did it, which then he ended up confessing it had been a lie. that he was just scared cops were gonna pin it on him, so he put it all on his cousin. He just came up with a random name too, if it wouldnt have been Daniel, he would have named a different name, Daniel's was just the first one he came up with.
@@joelsommer5765this is true. Even if his cousin didn't lie, it wasn't even close to enough evidence to prove his guilt.
Many of you please stop with the foolish comments about the prosecution woman. Also it's not that she's smart it's that many of you are dunce, she's using logic like I did from the start, I had Daniel guilty from watching the not guilty video.
That's the illogical part to this whole comment which is why he's guilty.
Read this again and watch the case over.
Nobody could care less
@@omniman9363 comment's and views say different. Regardless of what we think...
I can’t believe someone exists that would type this
You admit you’re wrong now?