(Nov. 2012 story)
ABC-7 first reported one week ago Department of Public Safety investigators raided Socorro Police headquarters and took with them boxes of documents. ABC-7 has now discovered why. These men are accused of unlawfully arresting a man, then lying about it in a sworn document, and then punishing another officer who wouldn't go along with their story.
According to Texas Ranger documents on May 23rd, detectives Israel Delgado and Javier Valerap pulled into the Ssocorro 7-11 on Horizon. That's when they spotted the motorcycle of Victor Grijavla which didn't have the proper license plates.
According to this Texas Ranger affidavit Socorro police pulled up behind Grijalva's motorcycle. Grijalva was inside 7-11 when he spotted the officers and he casually walked right out the store. Now according to this affidavit, Socorro police have a different story. They say they came into the 7-11 parking lot, with their lights and sirens on, and Grijalva saw them and he ran inside 7-11 evading arrest. Now what the officers didn't account for was 7-11 surveillance system which caught them in a lie.
Texas Rangers say they found a gross misrepresentationof the facts in the Socorro affidavit, and when they looked at the convenience store video,
They confirmed the detectives did not have their lights and sirens on, they never approached the man ordering him to stop, and he never ran away.
Texas Rangers go on to say Detective Mario Rodriguez told Delgado and Varela the arrest was illegal and he wanted no part of it, and Rodriguez, ended up getting suspended by Lt. Jose Alvarez and Chief Operating Officer Refugio Orta for not falling in line.
Alvarez and Orta, they've been charged with official oppression, a misdemeanor. Delgao and Valera, they're being charged with aggravated perjury, tampering with government documents, both felonies, and official oppression
The City Attorney for the City of Socorro Jerry Wallace said this in a statement:
“We’re attempting to review the cases without official information of the facts surrounding the investigation.
It seems however, we reviewed the case after the incident occurred and determined based on what was reported that the discipline action against the insubordinate officer was appropriate and determined the discipline of the officer for failing to take the subject into custody was in order.”
(Nov. 2012 story)