Release of suspect in Victoria Martens case hits a nerve

The decision by District Judge Charles Brown to allow the release of Fabian Gonzales, who faces reduced, but still serious, felony charges in the brutal slaying of 10-year-old Victoria Martens, has struck a community nerve. As it should.

And District Attorney Raúl Torrez has said his office will seek an expedited appeal of Brown’s decision. As he should.

Because further clarification by the Supreme Court is obviously needed as to what prosecutors are required to show to prove a defendant poses a danger to the community and should be detained pending trial.

The horrific circumstances surrounding the death and mutilation of Victoria make it one of, if not the most, shocking crimes of the century in Albuquerque. Gonzales, 35, initially was charged with murder. But the facts eventually showed he was roaming around town with the girl’s mother, Michelle Martens, when Victoria was killed. Gonzales’ cousin, career criminal Jessica Kelley, now says a well-dressed hitman showed up and killed the girl, saying it was payback to Gonzales.

While the murder charges have been dropped, Gonzales is still facing multiple counts of evidence tampering for allegedly helping dismember Victoria’s body, and with reckless child abuse resulting in death — the latter a first-degree felony — for leaving the child with Kelley. The investigation and prosecution have had problems. Gonzales has been in jail for three years, a serious issue as he has constitutional rights to a speedy trial.

But the question before Brown was if Gonzales should be able to wander the community while this case winds through the legal system. If past behavior is any judge, the restrictions Brown imposes may not matter, because Gonzales has a history of failing to comply with release conditions imposed during his checkered criminal past, which includes repeat instances of violence toward women.

A probation officer warned in 2012 Gonzales was at risk of reoffending and a risk to the community. A year later, after Gonzales absconded from probation, a probation officer wrote he “continues to do as he pleases” and needed to “be held accountable.”

Gonzales initially was held in the Martens case under a $1 million bond imposed prior to the constitutional amendment that approved a new system of pretrial detention. The Supreme Court has since ruled a judge can consider the circumstances of the alleged crime and a defendant’s full history of conduct “charged and uncharged” in deciding if he or she should be held.

Gonzales has a history of arrests. In one case he was charged with kidnapping and aggravated battery of a household member but pleaded to lesser charges of attempted false imprisonment. The battery involved an ex-girlfriend deputies discovered crying, cut and bruised on a South Valley road.

Gonzales was arrested again in 2014 for allegedly striking a different woman in the face while she was driving with their infant child in the back seat. That incident triggered a probation violation that led to a 300-day sentence.

Prosecutors in the Martens case argued Gonzales has shown extreme violence and the court should have no confidence he will comply with any conditions that could be fashioned to ensure community safety. Defense lawyers pointed out the most serious charges have been dropped and the prosecution theory for those left could be “hogwash.” Gonzales is in custody while appropriate “living arrangements” are found. Brown has been eviscerated on social media. More than 100 people with signs and blue ribbons demonstrated outside District Court on Sunday to protest the decision and demand justice for Victoria.

Brown, without question, faced a tough decision. The Administrative Office of the Courts took the unusual step of issuing a press release Sunday stating judges can’t be swayed by “emotion or public sentiment,” have a duty to follow the law, that there is a presumption of innocence. It added judges “take seriously their obligation to protect public safety” and Brown — who has taken flak for other pretrial releases — “carried out his responsibilities under the law” in deciding to release Gonzales. It said if prosecutors feel he erred they can seek an expedited appeal.

That should happen. Judges have a tough job, and the law can dictate unpopular decisions. But the system relies on public confidence in the rule of law and justice being done. That confidence has been shaken. It’s up to the Supreme Court to decide if Brown was right or wrong — and more importantly explain why in terms that help guide the public and judiciary in future cases.