Recent Activities - Pastor Daniel Arthur Hayes

January 26, 2007

SENT VIA FAX AND CERTIFIED MAIL

Armando R. Villalobos
Cameron County District Attorney
974 East Harrison Street
Brownsville, TX 78520
(956) 544-0869 fax

Re: Complaint Against Investigator Dennis Zamarron for Witness Intimidation, Witness Harassment, Attempt to Suborn Perjury, and Unethical Behavior; State of Texas v. Arthur Daniel Hayes; cause no. 2006-CR-2672-G & 2006-CR-2693-G

Dear District Attorney Villalobos,

I am writing on behalf of Ms. Mara Padilla in regard to an incident involving Cameron County District Attorney’s Office Investigator Dennis Zamarron (hereinafter “Zamarron”). On January 9, 2007 at around 7:30 a.m., Investigator Zamarron showed up at Mara Padilla’s home, 2001 North G. St., Harlingen, Texas 78550, with two other men. Zamarron identified himself as an investigator for the county and stated he wanted to question Ms. Padilla about the Hayes investigation. Asserting her civil rights, Ms. Padilla asked if the men had a search warrant or an arrest warrant. She was informed that they had neither. Ms. Padilla then asked the three men for identification. Zamarron handed her his business card and attempted to question her about the Hayes case. See copy of business card attached as “Exhibit 1.” When Ms. Padilla refused to respond, the two unidentified men proceeded to intimidate and frighten her.

The two men accompanying Zamarron were dressed in street clothes and when asked for identification, they refused to identify themselves, only saying that they were with immigration. You later stated in court that they were with INS. See court transcript attached as “Exhibit 2.” The first immigration agent told Ms. Padilla that if she refused to answer Zamarron’s questions she would have to answer his questions. He then told her that she “did not have permission to be in the Untied States legally,” all the while knowing this was untrue. Ms. Padilla told the men that she had her papers in order and he demanded to see documentation of her legal resident status. Ms. Padilla told the men that she would get her papers and tried to close the door but the immigration agent put his foot in her front doorway to keep her from closing it. She felt as if she was being wrongfully detained in her own home. When she explained that she wanted to close the door so that she could change out of her night gown and in to more appropriate clothing, the immigration agent kept his foot in the door and told her, “No.”

She finally was allowed to retrieve her documentation, and she showed the immigration agents her legal resident status papers. The second immigration agent wrote her information down and told her that “her permission to be in the United States had expired,” which was not true. Ms. Padilla is a legal resident of the United States and has been for many years. Anyone would find this kind of custodial interrogation highly inappropriate. When Ms. Padilla told the men that she was going to get a voice recorder to record any further conversation, the three men quickly fled.

Your explanation at our meeting on January 18, 2007, is difficult to believe. You stated that the reason Investigator Zamarron went to Mara Padilla’s home with two immigration agents by his side was that U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (hereinafter “USCIS”) contacted the District Attorney’s Office, out of the blue, about a USCIS investigation of Mara Padilla’s legal resident status. On January 19, 2007, at a hearing in the 404th Cameron County Court, you stated that immigration agents “tagged along” with Zamarron because Ms. Padilla “has become quite popular.” See court transcript attached as “Exhibit 2.” You stated that “she has been on television, she has been in the newspaper, so they have checked her out.” These explanations and excuses are false.

First, your statement in court regarding Ms. Padilla appearing on television and in the newspaper was inaccurate, false, and misleading. Ms. Padilla has never appeared on any television broadcast and as we have previously discussed, was only named in one December 31, 2006, San Benito News article in which she was referred to as an employee of Pastor Hayes and a member of his defense team. See news article attached as “Exhibit 3.” This is hardly the volume or the subject matter that one would expect to initiate an investigation by the USCIS office of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.

Second, it is suspiciously coincidental that USCIS was investigating Ms. Padilla at the same time the District Attorney’s Office was trying to question her about her involvement in a criminal investigation, and all of these coincidences were a week after the San Benito News stated that she was an employee of Pastor Hayes and a member of his defense team. See news article attached as “Exhibit 3.” It is a real stretch of the imagination that USCIS felt the need to contact the District Attorney’s Office about their investigation of Ms. Padilla. I was not aware that USCIS regularly requested the services of the District Attorney’s Office Investigators in Cameron County or anywhere else along the United States-Mexico Boarder. I was also unaware that USCIS and the District Attorney’s Office routinely conduct joint investigations. It is mind-boggling that all of these events aligned on January 9, 2007 at Mara Padilla’s front door.

I am also writing to inform the Cameron County District Attorney’s Office that Mara Padilla sought legal representation from The Bennett Law Firm. If Ms. Padilla faces any civil or criminal exposure in the future, we will determine at that time if she should seek other counsel. For purposes of contacting Mara Padilla, all inquiries should go through my office.

You and your staff are aware of the ethical issues involved with one represented by counsel. Rule 4.02 (a) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct states,

a lawyer shall not communicate or cause or encourage another to communicate about the subject of the representation with a person . . . the lawyer knows to be represented

by another lawyer regarding that subject, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized by law to do so.

On that same note, Ms. Padilla has been an employee of Pastor Hayes for several years and is assisting in his defense. This was reported by the San Benito News on December 31, 2006. See news article attached as “Exhibit 2.” Whether Ms Padilla is or is not a licensed investigator is not relevant. As you stated in court, you were aware that Ms. Padilla was working for Pastor Hayes’ defense team because she was contacting witnesses. See court transcript attached as “Exhibit 3.” You also stated that you were aware that she was employed by Pastor Hayes and even knew that her employment for Pastor Hayes predated this investigation by almost half a decade. As Rule 4.02 (b) of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct states,

a lawyer shall not communicate or cause another to communicate about the subject of representation with a person or organization a lawyer knows to be employed or retained for the purpose of conferring with or advising another lawyer about the subject of the representation, unless the lawyer has the consent of the other lawyer or is authorized by law to do so.

Thus, no one from your office should attempt to contact, intimidate, harass, or attempt to suborn perjury from Ms. Padilla. Your first contact should have been defense counsel for Ms. Padilla.

Investigator Zamarron and his unidentified colleagues from INS blatant attempt to intimidate and frighten Ms. Padilla with the suggestion of deportation is appalling. His attempt to question a member of a defense team and defendant’s employee is also unethical. This type of behavior by a county investigator should not be tolerated by the District Attorney as it is attributed to the entire Cameron County District Attorney’s Office and reflects poorly on the entire Cameron County District Attorney’s Office.

I hope that Investigator Zamarron’s conduct will be investigated and appropriate actions will be taken to ensure that no other Cameron County citizens are harassed in the same manner that Ms. Padilla was. At the very least, this letter should be placed in Investigator Dennis Zamarron’s personnel file with an admonition.

We are also asking for your cooperation as a public servant and the county’s highest law enforcement officer to provide the names of the two INS officers or investigators who went with Zamarron on the morning of January 9, 2007 to verbally attack Ms. Padilla. Their superiors should be notified and out of your respect for appropriate and ethical law enforcement we welcome your assistance in learning the identity of these rogue INS agents. We look forward to your immediate reply and assisting you in the investigation of the January 9th incident.

Should you have any questions or need additional information, please do not hesitate to contact our office.

Sincerely,

Robert S. “Bob” Bennett

Cc. Ms. Mara Padilla
Cc. Pastor Arthur Daniel Hayes