Witchcraft And The Stench Of Death

The New Mexico Supreme Court reversed a criminal conviction and barred retrial

In this case of severe and pervasive prosecutorial misconduct, exacerbated by a lackluster defense, we hold that an Assistant District Attorney who uses opening statements to expose the jury to incriminating allegations from a non-testifying codefendant, repeatedly accuses a defendant of witchcraft, and relies on inflammatory and inadmissible evidence throughout the case, has knowingly committed misconduct so unfairly prejudicial and with such willful disregard for a reversal on appeal that retrial is barred by double jeopardy under Article II, Section 15 of the New Mexico Constitution.

The crime

Joseph Morgas (Morgas) went missing in Taos, New Mexico, in August 2019. Police had no leads on the case for over a year. Then, in August 2020, police uncovered two suspects, Aram Montoya (Montoya) and his wife, Desiree Lensegrav (Defendant), after Montoya barricaded Defendant in their Taos home before repeatedly stabbing her in the neck and back with a paring knife. Montoya took Defendant to the hospital and he was thereafter arrested and jailed for the attempted murder of Defendant. Defendant was airlifted to the University of New Mexico Hospital in Albuquerque, New Mexico, and placed in a medically induced coma in the intensive care unit.

Montoya did not testify at defendant’s trial.

In his opening statement, and over no objection by the defense, ADA Ripol  told the jury that they were about to hear “a story,” as he phrased it, 

of a strong, smart, determined, manipulative, vengeful, capable, controlling, resilient, cunning, human being with a profound drug problem—[Defendant]—who used a needy, insecure, physically strong, and potentially violent human being—[Montoya]—with a soul—he had a soul and a conscience—that he could not control, no matter how much cocaine and meth he used with her, to disguise the agony and the pain of the horrific homicide that she told him and assisted him to commit. 

ADA Ripol then began his witchcraft accusations. He told the jury that the first witness would be Rodriguez, the owner of the drug house, who would testify that he watched Defendant’s eyes turn “black. With fury. And rage. And it was like a Hollywood movie. He could feel the wind coming out of her.” ADA Ripol stated that “in addition to her eyes turning black and the wind,” Rodriguez would also testify “that [Montoya] was like a zombie when he was around her. And that [Defendant] suggested to . . . Rodriguez on several occasions that she was a witch and that she would put menstrual blood concoctions into [Montoya’s] food to control him.” After a dramatic pause, ADA Ripol continued: “Joseph Morgas—the son of that grieving family back there—had to be eliminated by this wanna-be witch magic 1 woman,” whom he also called “this Cersei—right out of Game of Thrones.” Defense  never objected.

The prosecutor described Montoya’s “expected” testimony knowing he would not be called.

The remainder of the opening statement was similarly rife with hyperbole, grotesqueries, name-calling, and outlandish misstatements of what the evidence would show. ADA Ripol called Defendant “a worthless mother” and “a drug ho— not my words!” Additionally, without evidence, ADA Ripol said that Defendant “had some boyfriends on the side over [at the Taos County Sheriff’s Office].” ADA Ripol recounted florid details of an alleged confession—“Defendant’s own admissions,” as he called them—that Defendant personally strangled Morgas to death using twine. He told the jury that Defendant admitted to directing Montoya to burn the body and that “her own words” were, “take this shovel and cut off his head. Bash in his teeth so no one can identify the body!” ADA Ripol also told the jury that Defendant threw the shovel and head into the river. None of these allegations would conform to the evidence.

Introduction of stinking evidence

Finally, the State introduced foul-smelling physical evidence taken from the river and Morgas’s remains, the smell of which caused the district court to adjourn early on the second day of trial. During direct examination, one of the police officers unwrapped a shovel that was found in the river, which was assumed to be the shovel that Montoya used to decapitate Morgas, and walked it in front of the jury. The officer also displayed physical evidence that was taken directly off of Morgas’s body, all of which had been burnt and buried for over a year. This physical evidence—including two shoes, multiple items of clothing, and other items taken from the body—was opened one by one, walked in front of the jury, displayed on an ELMO (a courtroom document camera), and left out on a table in open court. During this process, the secondary prosecutor asked the officer, “is there an odor? Are you okay?” To which the officer responded, “Yes.”

Odor redux

The following day, the secondary prosecutor introduced more foul-smelling evidence recovered from Morgas’s body. Before the jury was called into the courtroom, the secondary prosecutor alerted the district court that she intended to introduce a partial shirt, pants, and a partial belt even though, as she admitted, “I’m cognizant that they—will smell.” The district court judge allowed them to be opened, displayed on the ELMO, and placed in bags. The judge noted that there were “some odors in the courtroom,” and the solution was to have the officer “perform the duties of Vanna White and . . . walk them around,” and then rebag the evidence.

Closing

In closing argument, ADA Ripol again raised the specter of Defendant’s eyes “turn[ing] black with rage” and “like a movie, [t]he wind . . . blowing through her hair in her fury” as supposed evidence of her intent to kill. ADA Ripol argued that the State had proven deliberate intention through evidence “that beating up [Morgas] was not enough. Because beating him up would make it worse for her and her continual legal problems”—evidence that was admitted only through an officer’s description of Montoya’s unconfronted hearsay statements to the police.

On rebuttal argument, ADA Ripol reminded the jury that Montoya “pled guilty to all his charges and is gonna die in” the penitentiary.

Final words

You know, folks. Back in the 60s there was a saying: ‘karma is a bitch.’ The choices that we make influence who and what we are. One of the poignant elements in this trial is that each and every one of us literally smelled the stench of death, caused by this woman, and that she took responsibility for.  The stench of death that each and every one of us could smell, so that the court had to adjourn early because of the biohazard and the reek. We just didn’t see and hear about death: we smelled it. And do you know who admitted? You do know who admitted to being responsible for the stench! Of death! That permeated this courtroom. [Defendant.] She owned up to responsibility. And when she had a  chance to deny responsibility, was before you was left speechless. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, the State demands, asks, requires that you go back and deliberate and find [Defendant] guilty for the stench of death that permeated this courtroom.

Two hours later, the jury returned guilty verdicts as to all counts.

Misconduct

At every stage of trial—from opening statement through rebuttal argument— the prosecution grounded its case in inadmissible evidence. ADA Ripol used opening statements to expose the jury to incriminating allegations from a nontestifying codefendant, repeatedly accused Defendant of witchcraft, unnecessarily displayed foul-smelling physical evidence that had been attached to the remains of a burnt and buried body, and told the jury that the State “demands” and “requires” the jury to convict Defendant “for the stench of death that permeated this courtroom.” The entire trial was filled with theatrics, hyperbole, and disparaging inflammatory statements, such that the extent of the misconduct cannot be fully conveyed in this opinion. In this analysis, we examine only the most egregious and dispositive misconduct.

No retrial

Defendant did not receive the fair trial to which she was entitled, and we, therefore, vacate her convictions. Because of the outrageous prosecutorial misconduct that pervaded this trial, double jeopardy bars reprosecution.

Taos News reported that the defendant had been sentenced to life plus 18 years. (Mike Frisch)