Almost two years to the day after police said Tomas Martinez
Romero opened fire into a car full of people, the accused attempted
murderer listened to testimony given by two of the victims
– both of whom identified him as the shooter.
Almost two years to the day after police said Tomas Martinez Romero opened fire into a car full of people, the accused attempted murderer listened to testimony given by two of the victims – both of whom identified him as the shooter.
At a preliminary hearing that was continued to allow time for additional testimony from Gilroy police officers Hugo Del Moral and Paco Rodriguez, two of the five occupants of the car Martinez Romero allegedly shot into gave several hours worth of testimony that pointed the finger at Martinez Romero.
One of the victims, a juvenile male who was 14 at the time of the shooting and suffered gunshot wounds to the stomach, testified quietly with the help of a Spanish-language translator, often times refining his answers as Deputy District Attorney Daniel Carr and the interpreter strove for clarity.
When asked if Martinez Romero – a tall, skinny light-skinned individual – was the shooter, the juvenile said, “The truth is, I don’t remember… He is identical to the one who shot at us.”
Judge Hector Ramon accepted this as positive identification and then Martinez Romero shook his head and locked eyes with the witness for a tense moment. The young man then finished his testimony with his head bowed, rarely looking up at the empty courtroom gallery.
The shooting occurred the evening of March 27, 2007, when Martinez Romero walked up to a white Toyota at the Stoney Court Apartments – located just south of San Ysidro Park and west of U.S. 101 in east Gilroy – and fired almost 10 rounds, police said. The vehicle’s occupants said they had been sitting in the car, chatting and sipping soda, when the shooter asked the car’s occupants, “which one of you is Sureño” and opened fire after the occupants replied that no one was a Sureño, according to police interviews. The teenage witness said he had been chased by Norteños while riding his bike earlier that evening.
Martinez Romero was originally arrested in connection with a grisly downtown stabbing – the city’s only murder in 2007. However, the charges were dropped and he was released from custody. An illegal alien, Martinez Romero was almost deported but police removed him from a bus at the last moment to serve him with the new charges in late July 2007. He faces two counts of attempted murder and possibly other charges.
Several conflicts of interests with defense attorneys and a language barrier delayed Martinez Romero’s case for months, and he has been sitting in county jail for more than 1.5 years.
After the public defender’s office and the alternate defender’s office cited conflicts of interest in representing Martinez Romero, the court appointed private attorney Steven Woodson to the case.
Woodson said one of the oddities of the case was that none of the victims identified Martinez Romero as the shooter in its early stages.
“They did know Mr. Martinez,” Woodson said. “That’s what makes this so strange.”
Woodson said that, although one of the victims knew Martinez Romero well and another victim had seen him before, a third didn’t pick Martinez Romero out of a photo lineup when questioned by police.
“In this case where identification plays a crucial part, often times you get misidentifications,” Woodson said, adding that eyewitness testimony is some of the least reliable evidence available. “It’s so susceptible to suggestibility. You often get witnesses telling police what they want to hear.”
Though there were five males in the car, only two testified because the court was unable to locate the other three, according to Carr.
“It’s been two years,” Carr said. “People tend to move along.”
The two witnesses included the boy who was shot and another boy who was in the back seat of the car at the time of the shooting but escaped injury.
“Ultimately everybody in that car was a victim,” Carr said.
The preliminary hearing – in which the judge hears testimony to decide if there is enough evidence to order the defendant to stand trial – will resume 9 a.m. April 9 in Department 105 of the new courthouse in Morgan Hill.
Woodson said that “nine times out of 10” the defendant is held to answer after the preliminary hearing, but it’s still to early to tell which direction the case will go, he said.
“I think they have problems with their case,” Woodson said. “We’ll know more when we see more.”
Reporter Chris Bone contributed to this story.
