Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire I Thought That This Guy Was Toast, But

Jury acquits father in shooting death of drunk driver

ANGLETON - The bereaved father who witnessed the death of his two young sons did not murder the drunken driver who killed them, a jury here in Brazoria County decided Wednesday, a coda that ratcheted up the emotions already thought to have peaked when both sides lost loved ones.

The jury acquitted David Barajas, who faced a murder charge in the shooting death of a 20-year-old man, Jose Banda. Banda drove his Chevrolet Malibu into the children while they pushed their father's stalled Ford 250 truck on an unlit road near Alvin to their nearby house. In a fit of retaliatory rage, prosecutors argued, Barajas returned to his home, retrieved a pistol and fired away at Banda's head with revenge.

But prosecutors faced an uphill climb in erasing any reasonable doubt in jurors' minds. Police failed to produce a murder weapon linked to the killing, gunpowder residue tests on Barajas' hands were negative and no witnesses saw anything that transpired on the dark December night. Though Barajas' attorneys could not identify who else could have killed Banda, who had a blood alcohol level twice the legal limit, the lawyers managed to create enough ambiguity that pushed a conviction out of reach.

The verdict opened any wounds that may had begun to heal since the 2012 deaths of Banda and Barajas' children, 11-year-old Caleb and 12-year-old David Jr.

That verdict has GOD BLESS TEXAS all over it.

GTC

once in awhile, you can even find a bit of justice in a courtroom.


God Bless Texas!

when the evidence just won't convict, it drives the liberals nuts.

First heard of that on last nights news here. I was thinking some form of temporary insanity would get that one by. Seems the practice though of being able to shoot the wife's lover or a child molester are pretty much a thing of the past.

I'm surprised the practice is not a bit more common given the instances where obviously guilty folks get off on some technicl issue.

Sometimes juries trump overzelous prosecutors, glad they triumphed in this case.

In Alaska, "he needed killing" has been a valid defense in a few cases.

I'm guessing that guy didn't talk to police without an attorney.

Calhoun, you took the words right out of my mouth. The importance of this is lost on many people.

mike r

No witnesses, no weapon, no powder residue, no incriminating statements by the defendant.

Based on what I've seen on the news, the prosecution was left with "Who else would have done it?"

Fair call by the jury. Not enough to convict. I wouldn't even call it jury nullification.

Why did the passengers in Banda's (the drunk) run from the scene? Nobody wants to say.

Open warrants?

Probably fuggin Illegals, would be my guess.

Anyhow, it's nice to see the Jury actually made a call where Justice was allready served.

And a big PLUS 100 on the Accused KEEPING his mouth SHUT when the cops made the arrest. Making a statement of ANY kind only helps the prosecutor.

Great news.

Now how in heck did he get the job done, get rid of the gun, and defeat powder residue tests?

All in all, I'm glad it wasnt me driving down a road at night with two people pushing a lightless truck. They were probably pushing from each rear corner and blocked the drunks headlights from hitting the reflectors. It's possible that the same result would have occurred whether the driver was drunk or not.

Jury nullification is a Fundamental Right!!

This is Texas, we understand that some folks just need killing.

They were all illegals, didn't speak English and I doubt the prosecution was too aggressive. Whatever the case, there are no winners here.

All the prosecutor had was a daydream.Takes more than that to win.

Gotta remember...a Grand Jury indicted the guy. They had to go forward with the case at that point.

True

My thoughts exactly.......