Probable cause finding in protest shooting case
Judge lowers one of the more serious charges against Steven Baca
Much like her time investigating the Oñate protest shooting, Kelsey Lueckenhoff’s testimony was short lived.
The Albuquerque police detective — and sole witness called by Steven Baca’s defense attorney — spent about a half hour testifying during a probable cause hearing Friday afternoon.
Her testimony was cut short by the judge after Lueckenhoff began to wade into secondhand accounts from undercover officers in a case that was taken from her in “less than 24 hours” due to concerns of a botched investigation.
Following a two-day hearing, state District Judge Cristina Jaramillo rejected one of the more serious charges, aggravated battery with
great bodily harm, a third-degree felony, connected to a woman who was violently thrown to the ground by Baca.
Jaramillo lowered that charge to misdemeanor aggravated battery, saying she took issue with the “great bodily harm” element as the woman reported bruising, but didn’t seek medical attention and, instead, even went to the Frontier to eat afterward.
But Jaramillo found probable cause to charge Baca with the other felony charge of aggravated battery with great bodily harm, and misdemeanor counts of battery and unlawful carrying of a deadly weapon in the shooting of Scott Williams and assault of two women during a protest outside the Albuquerque Museum on June 15.
“The court finds that there are some significant inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimony versus the pictures and the video that will … have to be argued before a jury,” Jaramillo said.
The incident garnered national attention after protesters attempting to fell the controversial Juan de Oñate statue faced off with the New Mexico Civil Guard, a heavily armed civilian militia, outside the Old Town-area museum. The situation escalated, culminating in Williams being shot and riot police swooping in to quell the crowd.
The next day, the case was taken from Detective Lueckenhoff, and APD as a whole, at the request of 2nd Judicial District Attorney Raúl Torrez due to the DA’s concerns about APD’s handling of the investigation and protest response.
During Friday afternoon’s hearing, Lueckenhoff said it wasn’t a “typical scenario” when she was called to a briefing by undercover detectives from the protest before viewing video and doing interviews.
Lueckenhoff said she filed the complaint on Baca at 5 a.m. on June 16 and, by 1 p.m., she was “somewhat notified” that the case had been handed off to New Mexico State Police. Torrez said Lueckenhoff’s complaint omitted crucial details — such as
Baca assaulting women in the crowd — and that APD’s riot-clad response possibly compromised key evidence and witnesses.
Minutes into the detective’s testimony, prosecutor John Duran began a string of objections as defense attorney Diego Esquibel asked for Lueckenhoff’s analysis of the video of the protest — calling it hearsay and “an opinion.”
Jaramillo overruled many of Duran’s objections, but stopped Lueckenhoff’s testimony when the detective began giving the secondhand narrative of undercover officers.
“We have reached the conclusion of this officer’s investigation — and I don’t think anything more would benefit this court,” Jaramillo said. “I know what you’re asking and I do believe that would be going into an area that we cannot go into.”
After Lueckenhoff was excused, Duran argued the intent of Baca to injure Williams — whose back was turned — and the two women. Esquibel argued those conflicts arose while Baca was defending himself against an angry mob and trying to help a counterprotester.
“The people who were there were not there for a peaceful rally as they say,” he said. “The video shows people walking around with bats, chains, the fact that there was a pickaxe there. There’s not a peace, love, happiness vibe from everybody.”
Esquibel said Baca “oftentimes seen standing around” during video didn’t pull out a gun until two people were holding him down and doesn’t fire until he’s confronted with a skateboard-wielding Williams.
In his rebuttal, Duran painted a much different portrait of the scene.
“Who arrived at this rally with bear spray concealed, who arrived at this rally with a firearm concealed and who laid hands on who during the course of this rally?” he asked. “… This individual showed up for this exclusive purpose, he didn’t show up to counter protest, he showed up to make a ruckus.”