On June 20th 2016, criminal complaint H16-924 M was filed by Ryan Salinas alleging probable cause to believe that Edgar Avila had violated 18 U.S.C. 1341 (Mail Fraud) and 18 U.S.C. 1344 (Bank Fraud). In his closing remarks, Salinas further called for Avila’s arrest. [Salinas did not allege in the complaint that any part of 18 U.S.C. applies to Avila, nor did he cite any evidence to support such an allegation.]
On June 21st 2016, Stephen Smith signed the complaint, stating that he found probable cause for an arrest warrant to be issued for violations of 18 U.S.C. 1341 and 1344. [Smith added nothing to the complaint, therefore the applicability of 18 U.S.C. remains unclaimed and unsupported at this point.] It is assumed, but unconfirmed at this time, that Smith subsequently signed a warrant ordering Avila’s arrest and detention.
On July 14th 2016, according to Criminal Indictment H16CR0310 (signed by Jim McAlister), a Grand Jury allegedly¹ found cause to charge Edgar Avila with 1 count of False Statement to Obtain a Loan (18 U.S.C. 1014) and 2 counts of Mail Fraud (18 U.S.C. 1341). [There is still no mention of the applicability of 18 U.S.C. at this point.]²
If you’ve already read about Edgar Avila on Rachel Dollar’s Mortgage Fraud Blog, you might think that the story ends there (and, thanks to her biased writing style, you’d probably be 100% certain that Edgar is guilty as sin). However, what Rachel didn’t report is – well, literally everything except the official line from Ryan Salinas’ criminal complaint.
For starters, on June 23rd 2016, according to Mandy Avila, Edgar Avila was “taken into Federal custody.” Further investigation indicates that Mr. Avila was kidnapped by armed U.S. Marshals and caged at the Joe Corley Detention Center (where he is presumably still being held)³ at 500 Hilbig Rd. in Conroe, Texas. This occurred two days after Stephen Smith signed Ryan Salinas’s complaint and 21 days before a Grand Jury allegedly found cause for charges to be brought against Mr. Avila, and this fact raises a host of ethical questions concerning Mr. Avila’s circumstance and the conduct of his attackers (Salinas, Smith, the marshals who kidnapped him, and the jailers at Joe Corley). For example:
- Why was Mr. Avila arrested and held captive for three weeks before a Grand Jury was allegedly convened? Why did Salinas call for Avila’s immediate arrest rather than waiting for the Grand Jury to indict him, and why did Smith honor that call?
- Why was it even possible for Smith to order the imprisonment of an innocent man without an indictment? What is the purpose of a Grand Jury if it is powerless to prevent the innocent from being imprisoned at the whims of government employees?
- Why did the marshals and the jailers violate ethics and due process by acting on Smith’s orders and locking an innocent man in a cell without so much as an indictment?
- Where was Mr. Avila’s right to due process? Where was the 5th Amendment when he needed it? Where will it be when you need it?
- And, after you spend the better part of a month (or months, or years) rotting in a cage, if you’re finally able to prove your innocence, what do they say then? “Oh, turns out you were innocent all along. Sorry you got raped, wanted to kill yourself, etc. But now you’re free, so no harm done, right?” If you’re thinking that’s ridiculous, then you’re probably right. From what I’ve heard, they’re not likely to be that nice about it.
Furthermore, on July 7th 2016, a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus was sent via U.S. Mail to the Montgomery County Courthouse at 301 N Main St #110 in Conroe, TX, to initiate a hearing to show the legal grounds for the incarceration of Edgar Avila. During multiple calls to the Montgomery courthouse in the days and weeks that followed, the county clerks refused to confirm or deny that they had received the Habeas petition, thus effectively disallowing the petitioner pursuit of a hearing, in clear violation of:
- the Texas Public Information Act, Texas Government Code Chapter 552, to which all Texas government offices are ostensibly bound,
- the U.S. court system’s own rules regarding Habeas petitions, and
- the most basic principles of human ethics.
The story doesn’t end here. Nor does it begin where they say it does. The “authorities” in southeast Texas have had it in for Edgar for quite some time. Telling the whole story will be challenging, and obtaining the court records to prove it, it seems, will be even more so. Look for Part 2 in the coming weeks.