By Brett Talley and Alice LaCour
Pablo Velez Jr. has been imprisoned for nearly 20 years for a murder he may not have committed, stemming from a shooting incident on July 15, 2004, at a sports bar in Houston, Texas. We recently covered his case in three episodes in February and he is expected to have his next parole hearing by April 2025. This video is an excerpt from our series. You can listen to those episodes here, here and here.
At a time when dubious innocence claims (see our episodes on Scott Peterson and Adnan Syed) garner the limelight, clear cases of wrongful conviction, like Pablo’s, do not get much attention. The reasons for that are up for debate. However, we felt strongly enough about this case to write a letter to the Texas Board of Paroles and Pardons advocating for a commutation of Pablo’s sentence. We are sharing this as an open letter to encourage the board and to promote a wide dialogue around the case and how innocence cases are handled.
The incident began after Adrian Payan was beaten by three men, leading to a confrontation the following night. During the confrontation, multiple shooters were involved, and a 17-year-old, Emersen Bojorquez was killed. Pablo was identified as a shooter based on a witness's testimony and the ownership of a Cadillac linked to the crime scene. The key witness, Claudia Beltran, later expressed uncertainty about her identification of Pablo, stating the shooter had lighter hair.
Pablo's defense attorney was criticized for inadequate representation, which may have contributed to the conviction. Key evidence and testimonies were not disclosed to the defense, raising concerns about the fairness of the trial. Witness Mario Sosa identified other shooters but refused to testify due to safety concerns, highlighting the gang-related nature of the case. Claudia's affidavit suggested pressure from the district attorney to maintain her original testimony, despite her doubts. Jason Wooley, another involved party, submitted an affidavit stating Pablo had no involvement in the shootings.
Our discussion in this video emphasizes the wrongful conviction of Pablo and we call for more resources and strategies to be allocated to similar cases of potential innocence.
Open Letter to the Texas Board of Pardons and Parole
Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles Palestine Board Office 133 E. Reagan Street Palestine, TX 75801
RE: Pablo Velez, Jr. TDCJ# 1363722
To the Commissioners:
Thank you for this opportunity to support the parole of Pablo Velez, Jr. After serving more than seventy percent of his 30-year sentence, Pablo is not a danger to society and is an excellent candidate for release.
We are lawyers, prosecutors, and the hosts of The Prosecutors podcast. Through that production, we bring our years of legal and prosecutorial experience to controversial cases from around the country. Pablo’s case is one of them. After reviewing the evidence entered at trial, the transcript of the proceedings, and subsequent developments, we came to one inescapable conclusion—Pablo Velez Jr. is an innocent man in prison for a crime he did not commit.
We realize that it is not the job of the parole board to determine guilt or innocence. That decision was made by the jury in Pablo’s case. But in deciding parole, the Board is charged with determining the risk an offender poses to the public. The Board is further empowered to consider the characteristics of each individual who comes before you. As such, if the evidence strongly suggests that Pablo did not commit the crime for which he was incarcerated, that fact is one the Board can, and should, consider in making a final determination.
We have released over 300 episodes of our podcast. Over the course of those episodes, we have reviewed a number of so-called innocence cases. In most of those cases, we have had no trouble finding that the guilt of the accused was obvious. This includes famous cases such as those of Adnan Syed, Scott Peterson, and Darlie Routier. Pablo’s case is different. We have never seen a more obvious case of wrongful conviction.
Pablo’s case begins on July 15, 2004, when three men—Adrian Payan, Emerson Bojorquez, and Esteban Rodriguez—arrived at the Perfect Rack Sports Bar and Grill in Houston. They were there to avenge a fight from the night before when Payan had been assaulted by three other men—Jason Wooley, Ron Strandberg, and Richard “Shorty” Cisneros.
Upon arriving, Adrian Payan saw Jason Wooley standing outside the bar. He approached him. Wooley pulled out a 9mm pistol and fired a shot into the ground. After this, two other shooters opened fire. Payan and his friends fled. Payan was struck but would survive. Emerson Bojorquez was not so lucky; he was killed in the shootout.
Claudia Beltran, a girlfriend of Adrian Payan, followed the shooters who had fled in a gold Cadillac. She took down the license plate number and gave it to the police. The Cadillac was registered to Pablo. Claudia had also seen one of the shooters from the side and had provided a description to investigators. She was then shown a photo lineup, consisting of driver’s license photos, of men she was told fit the description she had given. One of those photos was of Pablo. Claudia said the photo of Pablo looked like the man she had seen, though the shooter’s hair was lighter. On the basis of the Cadillac registration and Claudia’s identification, Pablo was charged with the murder of Bojorquez. A jury would convict him, and he received a sentence of 30 years of imprisonment.
At first glance, Pablo’s conviction seems solid. He is the registered owner of the vehicle seen fleeing the scene. And he was identified by a witness. But that evidence falls apart at even the barest inspection.
First, although Pablo was the registered owner of the vehicle, he would tell police that he had been unable to make the payments on the vehicle and had given it to someone who could—Ron Strandberg, one of the men who had been involved in the fight at the Perfect Rack the night before the shooting. Pablo’s story may seem convenient, but independent evidence confirmed it. Mere days before the shooting, Strandberg took the car to E-Race Performance to have a new stereo installed.
In the hours immediately before and after the shooting, there were 51 calls between Ron Strandberg, Jason Wooley, and Richard “Shorty” Cisneros. There were no calls with Pablo Velez, Jr. And whatever the men were planning to do that night, Pablo would have been unaware. Not only was Pablo not at the Perfect Rack the night before during the fight, he was on his long-haul trucking route and did not return home until at least 1:00 a.m. the morning of the shooting. This timing was confirmed both by Pablo’s own cell phone pings and the testimony of his co-driver, Elgie Holmes. How Pablo knew to be at the Perfect Rack at 2:00 a.m. for an ambush to avenge a fight he was not a part of is a mystery the prosecution was never able to explain.
But what about Claudia Beltran and her identification? Claudia described the shooter to police as around 5’4” with a normal build and light hair—a small person. She was told that the lineup she was shown included people who met her description. Pablo doesn’t fit this description at all. Pablo was over 6 feet tall and weighed 230 pounds. Claudia, who had only seen the shooter from the side, hesitantly chose Pablo from the lineup.
Later, Claudia would testify at the trial of Jason Wooley. During that trial, she saw a man in the gallery who she immediately recognized as the second shooter. She assumed this was the same man she’d identified in the lineup. But when she arrived at Pablo’s trial, she realized something was terribly wrong. Pablo was not the shooter. Claudia told the prosecutor as much. We know this occurred because in her opening statement, the prosecutor told the jury that she did not expect Claudia would identify Pablo from the stand. And, indeed, Claudia did not, testifying that Pablo did not match the description of the man she saw. It’s unfortunate that Pablo’s defense attorney did not ask her if she knew who the shooter was. If he had, Claudia could have told him that the shooter was the same man she saw at Jason Wooley’s trial—Richard “Shorty” Cisneros.
The above is just a sampling of the evidence in Pablo’s favor. It does not include the affidavits from witnesses who did not testify because they were afraid to do so. The three men who were undoubtedly responsible for the shooting were dangerous men who people feared. So, Pablo took the fall for a crime he did not commit.
It is not the job of this Board to right wrongs or exonerate defendants, and we are not asking you to do that with Pablo. And yet, if Pablo is innocent, then certainly no one could be more deserving of parole than him.
But even if he is not, even if we are wrong, Pablo has now served nearly 21 years of his 30-year sentence, or around 70 percent. According to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, the average parolee served around 52 percent of his or her sentence.[1] The average violent offender served around 67.4 percent of his or her sentence before parole. Even offenders designated as 3G inmates—those convicted of the worst of the worst offenses—served only slightly more time than Pablo has now served before their parole—around 73.8 percent of their sentence.
As prosecutors, we take seriously our obligation to serve the public interest and to act with integrity and balanced judgment to increase public safety. By any measure, whether the Board considers Pablo to be wrongfully convicted or even if you decide not to even consider that possibility, Pablo is an excellent candidate for parole. He has served his time. He has demonstrated that he is prepared to reenter society. The next step is for this Board to grant him release.
We respectfully ask the Board to grant parole to Pablo Velez, Jr.
[1] https://www.tdcj.texas.gov/documents/Statistical_Report_FY2023.pdf
Brett Talley and Alice LaCour are co-hosts of The Prosecutors podcast and The Prosecutors: Legal Briefs.
Share this post