{"id":109132,"date":"2025-02-24T17:02:59","date_gmt":"2025-02-25T01:02:59","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/02\/24\/calling-defendant-a-witch-who-controls-men-with-menstrual-blood-doesnt-work-out-for-prosecutors\/"},"modified":"2025-02-24T17:02:59","modified_gmt":"2025-02-25T01:02:59","slug":"calling-defendant-a-witch-who-controls-men-with-menstrual-blood-doesnt-work-out-for-prosecutors","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/2025\/02\/24\/calling-defendant-a-witch-who-controls-men-with-menstrual-blood-doesnt-work-out-for-prosecutors\/","title":{"rendered":"Calling Defendant A Witch Who Controls Men With Menstrual Blood Doesn\u2019t Work Out For Prosecutors"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

One hoped that Justice Alito opening the door to basing constitutional law on the rantings of 17th century witch hunters<\/a> would usher in a new era where we could finally<\/em> get back to some old-fashioned stake burnings. Nothing is more \u201cdeeply rooted in the Nation\u2019s history and traditions\u201d than putting a stop to Strega Nona\u2019s noodle nonsense. Alas, the box office success of Wicked<\/em> has beguiled the New Mexico supreme court into complacency, tossing a murder conviction. APPARENTLY prosecutors telling the jury that the defendant has the power to control men through her menstrual blood is frowned upon<\/em>.<\/p>\n

In all seriousness, you\u2019ve probably made it to this point in the story believing there\u2019s no way the facts of this case match the clickbait headline. Friends, let me direct you to the Santa Fe New Mexican<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cBolstered with copious amounts of other inflammatory and inadmissible evidence, including allegations that Defendant was a \u2018witch\u2019 and a \u2018bruja\u2019 \u2026 who controlled Mr. Montoya through her menstrual blood, ADA Ripol embarked on a three-day-long exercise in pathos and character assassination that utterly deprived Defendant of a fair trial that is guaranteed by the New Mexico Constitution,\u201d the court wrote.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

As everyone<\/em> knows, these statements should\u2019ve put a stop to the trial so the defendant should\u2019ve been weighed against a duck<\/a> to prove the veracity of these claims. That\u2019s just jury instructions 101.<\/p>\n

In all seriousness though, this is a real life state supreme court opinion<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The \u201cMr. Montoya\u201d in question pleaded guilty in the kidnap and murder of Joseph Morgas. Montoya\u2019s wife, Desiree Lensegrav, was later sentenced to 45 years based on her alleged involvement. Being New Mexico, the case obviously involved meth, with Morgas making a stream of horrific comments to Lensegrav at a drug house, which prompted Montoya to confront Morgas, killing him during the ensuing struggle.<\/p>\n

You\u2019re probably thinking the prosecutor was just colloquially if misogynistically insinuating that the defendant \u201ccontrolled\u201d men with her wiles or in some mutually endorsed neo-Pagan cult. And while the prosecutor would occasionally use terms like \u201cwannabe\u201d about the defendant\u2019s witch status, the case did not shy away from \u201cyo, she might actually be supernatural!\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

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\u2019s eyes turn \u201cblack. With fury. And rage. And it was like a Hollywood movie. He could feel the wind coming out of her.\u201d ADA Ripol stated that \u201cin addition to her eyes turning black and the wind,\u201d Rodriguez would also testify \u201cthat [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\u2019s] food to control him.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The drug house owner thought witchcraft turned Montoya into a zombie? I\u2019m no Hogwarts graduate, but I\u2019m thinking that might\u2019ve been the meth.<\/p>\n

\n

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 reversal on appeal that retrial is barred by double jeopardy.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

A \u201clackluster defense,\u201d you say? You mean to suggest a defense team that didn\u2019t shut down the \u201clady flower hemomancy\u201d allegations displayed insufficient zeal? If you\u2019re wondering where the trial judge was in all of this, the opinion notes that the judge called the attorneys to the bench seemingly to \u201cwink wink\u201d to the defense that this is the part where they should be saying \u201cobjection\u201d to no avail.<\/p>\n

You\u2019d think a witch with the powers of Satan at her command could at least force a lawyer to object. Or borrowed Roy Cohn.<\/p>\n

Of all the abuses, the worst \u2014 yes, worse than the witch stuff \u2014 is the part the court describes as exposing \u201cthe jury to incriminating allegations from a non-testifying codefendant.\u201d Because what they mean is that prosecutors used the opening statements to share Montoya\u2019s claims incriminating Lensegrav but decided \u2014 before opening statements<\/em> \u2014 to yank Montoya from the witness list claiming he was a hostile witness. Thus taking full benefit of Montoya\u2019s inflammatory claims throwing his wife under the bus without offering the defense an opportunity to cross. Then they invoked Montoya again in closing.<\/p>\n

But also\u2026 this case was cracked because Montoya subsequently tried to murder Lensegrav<\/em>. So when prosecutors decided to inject Montoya\u2019s statements incriminating Lensegrav, they did so knowing he\u2019d tried to kill her. <\/p>\n

This is the part where most courts shrug and dismiss all of this as \u201charmless error.\u201d But the conduct shocked the New Mexico supremes to the point that they tossed the conviction and refused to allow the prosecutors a second bite at the apple. Which you\u2019d think might be a poisoned apple \u2014 except these prosecutors weren\u2019t remotely fair, let alone the fairest of them all.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe 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,\u201d they said which is wild because if this account IS NOT fully conveying the misconduct what the hell else was there?<\/p>\n

And while it sometimes feels as though cops and prosecutors can get away with just about anything before a court tosses a conviction, the New Mexico supreme court decided that wherever it is that the line gets crossed, it\u2019s somewhere before you tell a jury that you saw Goody Proctor with the Devil.<\/p>\n

(Full opinion on the next page\u2026)<\/em><\/p>\n

New Mexico Supreme Court overturns murder conviction of woman prosecutor called a \u2018witch\u2019<\/a> [Santa Fe New Mexican]<\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search<\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The post Calling Defendant A Witch Who Controls Men With Menstrual Blood Doesn\u2019t Work Out For Prosecutors<\/a> appeared first on Above the Law<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"
<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

One hoped that Justice Alito opening the door to basing constitutional law on the rantings of 17th century witch hunters<\/a> would usher in a new era where we could finally<\/em> get back to some old-fashioned stake burnings. Nothing is more \u201cdeeply rooted in the Nation\u2019s history and traditions\u201d than putting a stop to Strega Nona\u2019s noodle nonsense. Alas, the box office success of Wicked<\/em> has beguiled the New Mexico supreme court into complacency, tossing a murder conviction. APPARENTLY prosecutors telling the jury that the defendant has the power to control men through her menstrual blood is frowned upon<\/em>.<\/p>\n

In all seriousness, you\u2019ve probably made it to this point in the story believing there\u2019s no way the facts of this case match the clickbait headline. Friends, let me direct you to the Santa Fe New Mexican<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\n

\u201cBolstered with copious amounts of other inflammatory and inadmissible evidence, including allegations that Defendant was a \u2018witch\u2019 and a \u2018bruja\u2019 \u2026 who controlled Mr. Montoya through her menstrual blood, ADA Ripol embarked on a three-day-long exercise in pathos and character assassination that utterly deprived Defendant of a fair trial that is guaranteed by the New Mexico Constitution,\u201d the court wrote.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

As everyone<\/em> knows, these statements should\u2019ve put a stop to the trial so the defendant should\u2019ve been weighed against a duck<\/a> to prove the veracity of these claims. That\u2019s just jury instructions 101.<\/p>\n

In all seriousness though, this is a real life state supreme court opinion<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The \u201cMr. Montoya\u201d in question pleaded guilty in the kidnap and murder of Joseph Morgas. Montoya\u2019s wife, Desiree Lensegrav, was later sentenced to 45 years based on her alleged involvement. Being New Mexico, the case obviously involved meth, with Morgas making a stream of horrific comments to Lensegrav at a drug house, which prompted Montoya to confront Morgas, killing him during the ensuing struggle.<\/p>\n

You\u2019re probably thinking the prosecutor was just colloquially if misogynistically insinuating that the defendant \u201ccontrolled\u201d men with her wiles or in some mutually endorsed neo-Pagan cult. And while the prosecutor would occasionally use terms like \u201cwannabe\u201d about the defendant\u2019s witch status, the case did not shy away from \u201cyo, she might actually be supernatural!\u201d<\/p>\n

\n

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\u2019s eyes turn \u201cblack. With fury. And rage. And it was like a Hollywood movie. He could feel the wind coming out of her.\u201d ADA Ripol stated that \u201cin addition to her eyes turning black and the wind,\u201d Rodriguez would also testify \u201cthat [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\u2019s] food to control him.\u201d<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

The drug house owner thought witchcraft turned Montoya into a zombie? I\u2019m no Hogwarts graduate, but I\u2019m thinking that might\u2019ve been the meth.<\/p>\n

\n

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 reversal on appeal that retrial is barred by double jeopardy.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

A \u201clackluster defense,\u201d you say? You mean to suggest a defense team that didn\u2019t shut down the \u201clady flower hemomancy\u201d allegations displayed insufficient zeal? If you\u2019re wondering where the trial judge was in all of this, the opinion notes that the judge called the attorneys to the bench seemingly to \u201cwink wink\u201d to the defense that this is the part where they should be saying \u201cobjection\u201d to no avail.<\/p>\n

You\u2019d think a witch with the powers of Satan at her command could at least force a lawyer to object. Or borrowed Roy Cohn.<\/p>\n

Of all the abuses, the worst \u2014 yes, worse than the witch stuff \u2014 is the part the court describes as exposing \u201cthe jury to incriminating allegations from a non-testifying codefendant.\u201d Because what they mean is that prosecutors used the opening statements to share Montoya\u2019s claims incriminating Lensegrav but decided \u2014 before opening statements<\/em> \u2014 to yank Montoya from the witness list claiming he was a hostile witness. Thus taking full benefit of Montoya\u2019s inflammatory claims throwing his wife under the bus without offering the defense an opportunity to cross. Then they invoked Montoya again in closing.<\/p>\n

But also\u2026 this case was cracked because Montoya subsequently tried to murder Lensegrav<\/em>. So when prosecutors decided to inject Montoya\u2019s statements incriminating Lensegrav, they did so knowing he\u2019d tried to kill her. <\/p>\n

This is the part where most courts shrug and dismiss all of this as \u201charmless error.\u201d But the conduct shocked the New Mexico supremes to the point that they tossed the conviction and refused to allow the prosecutors a second bite at the apple. Which you\u2019d think might be a poisoned apple \u2014 except these prosecutors weren\u2019t remotely fair, let alone the fairest of them all.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe 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,\u201d they said which is wild because if this account IS NOT fully conveying the misconduct what the hell else was there?<\/p>\n

And while it sometimes feels as though cops and prosecutors can get away with just about anything before a court tosses a conviction, the New Mexico supreme court decided that wherever it is that the line gets crossed, it\u2019s somewhere before you tell a jury that you saw Goody Proctor with the Devil.<\/p>\n

(Full opinion on the next page\u2026)<\/em><\/p>\n

New Mexico Supreme Court overturns murder conviction of woman prosecutor called a \u2018witch\u2019<\/a> [Santa Fe New Mexican]<\/p>\n

\n

\"Headshot\"Joe Patrice<\/a>\u00a0is a senior editor at Above the Law and co-host of Thinking Like A Lawyer<\/a>. Feel free to\u00a0email<\/a> any tips, questions, or comments. Follow him on\u00a0Twitter<\/a>\u00a0or Bluesky<\/a> if you\u2019re interested in law, politics, and a healthy dose of college sports news. Joe also serves as a Managing Director at RPN Executive Search<\/a>.<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

1<\/strong> 2<\/a>Next \u00bb<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

One hoped that Justice Alito opening the door to basing constitutional law on the rantings of 17th century witch hunters would usher in a new era where we could finally get back to some old-fashioned stake burnings. Nothing is more \u201cdeeply rooted in the Nation\u2019s history and traditions\u201d than putting a stop to Strega Nona\u2019s […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":109095,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"","_et_pb_old_content":"","_et_gb_content_width":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-109132","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-above_the_law"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/xira.com\/p\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/02\/Headshot-300x200-eRfu8d.jpeg?fit=300%2C200&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109132","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=109132"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/109132\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/109095"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=109132"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=109132"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/xira.com\/p\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=109132"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}