HOUSTON – The two men accused of killing 12-year-old Jocelyn Nungaray have been charged with capital murder.22-year-old Johan Jose Martinez-Rangel and 26-year-old Franklin Pena are being held right now on a $10 million bond.
According to U.S. Immigration officials, both of these men are Venezuelan nationals who entered the country illegally. Currently, they are under immigration hold by federal authorities. So this means that they would remain in custody even if they could post bond.
Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg joined the KPRC 2+ stream Thursday morning to discuss the ongoing investigation with our Brittany Jeffers.
Brittany Jeffers: Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us this morning
Harris County D.A. Kim Ogg: It’s so important for people to support this family right now. We appreciate the coverage.
Jeffers: This is one of these cases that has rocked the community, her family, her friends, and people who don’t know her as a member of the media. This has been a really difficult one to follow and process. And we know one of the big questions, one of the things that is just really an intricacy of this case is the fact that her accused killers, they’re not eligible right now for the death penalty, but we know that that could potentially change. Can you kind of walk us through why that is and what that could mean going forward?
Ogg: Anytime there’s discrepancies in the law that are related to the victim’s age, you can get different results based on that age. For example, a child under ten who’s murdered means that some the murderer could face the death penalty, but children 10 to 15. The law limits it to life without parole as the maximum punishment. The legislature decided that it’s unclear why. But if there’s an underlying felony of sexual assault, then these same defendants will be eligible for the death penalty.
Jeffers: So a very fluid situation as we just kind of wait to find out.
Ogg: It is. All cases evolve and we file charges early because we want those dangerous defendants in custody. We don’t wait for all of the evidence to make the initial charge, because we want to protect the public, and we want to give the victim’s family some assurance that these monsters are not going to flee the jurisdiction. We want a Texas jury to hear them and a Houston jury to hear them these cases. So I think it’s really important to know that, regardless of what the charges are at the beginning, through technology that evolves in DNA and through all kinds of other means, video that we may not have. There’s always the possibility of additional evidence or evidence that can be tested further, not just today, but tomorrow. We’ve seen that in the Housewife Florida case, where the DNA testing wasn’t sufficient in one year to charge. And yet two years later, it was. Science had evolved. So we’re watching this case very closely. We’ve asked for prioritized lab testing, and we’re just going to see what the evidence shows. And that’s where we’ll go.
Jeffers: And as that kind of evolves search, you’re talking about that. You know the technology transforms. This is kind of a day to day thing. But as new evidence emerges in this case, how could that potentially impact their bond potentially going forward?
Ogg: You know, because these two defendants are from another country, it’s difficult to get records. The Venezuelan government is not cooperating with the American government right now. And so what their backgrounds are, what they’ve done in their own country, any crimes that they’ve committed. All of those things, those aggravating factors, could really impact this trial. Likewise, if there’s some evidence of mental illness or health issues, other mitigating evidence, the defense will be looking for that because they don’t want their clients to face the death penalty.
Jeffers: Right now we have to touch on this because this is certainly kind of, renewed the debate, I guess at this point, about our country’s immigration system. And we talk about these two being, from Venezuela, talk about the complexities of this case and our border and how they may or may not go hand in hand to their.
Ogg: So in our job, it’s really important to not consider immigration status of victims or accused criminals. The reason is we have equal protection in this country for everyone. And so it when it comes to prosecution, there’s no difference. But you see, in the bond hearing, our concern is that they would flee the country. So that makes them a higher risk defendant for not reappearing. That affects the case. And their immigration status is clearly important in that realm when it comes to whether they’re eligible for the death penalty. That’s totally based on the crime, the actions and the evidence that we’ve got. The bigger problem our immigration system, the border broken for decades. Any. And knows that we’ve seen it, you know, for a long time here. What’s different is we’re seeing people from other countries. It’s not just, immigrants from Mexico. We’re seeing immigrants from China, from the islands, from South America, like these individuals. That’s new. And I think it’s increasing the risk factor for regular people here. So I’m hoping that our government will work together in a bipartisan fashion to keep the public safe by making our borders safer. These two guys were both on ice holds and they had ankle monitors. One of them cut it off. The ankle monitors give the public a false sense of security. We don’t rely on them as prosecutors because we see too many problems with folks who are supposed to be under supervision and yet aren’t. And that’s the case with these two guys. They should have never been released when they crossed over in El Paso. But we have a broken system, and Jocelyn’s death resulted. And it’s just hard when, you know, something could have been prevented. Like a child’s death. They’re always horrible. But this one in particular was so brutal, this, little girl endured. What? No. Nobody should have to endure. So that’s. That’s the answer to immigration. Crime and prosecution is not political. The greater issues, of course, are. And I’m sure it’ll come up in the debate tonight.
Jeffers: And this is a case that has impacted the community, but also your office, because from the beginning when you were involved, working very closely, tell us how the homicide division of your office has been working not only with this case, but prioritizing murder cases. Just walk us through this.
Ogg: Well, thanks for giving me the opportunity to brag on prosecutors who work their tails off for the public. We created a homicide division almost three years ago because we had such a huge backlog of capital murder cases and murders. Today, we have 1733 of those cases pending, with about half of the accused out on the street, either as fugitives or on bail. The other half, approximately, are in jail. We want those cases prioritized. Evidence gets old, witnesses die, they get lost, they leave town. It’s very important that our most dangerous offenders are tried first to protect the public. So the creation of the homicide division gave us the staff power to do that. The law that was passed last session by the Texas Legislature that prioritized the prosecution of murder and capital murder, came out of Houston and out of this county’s need to get our judiciary motivated to try these cases first. And since then, we’ve seen hundreds of these cases processed and completed. But our homicide rate is right now looking at 4 to 500. This year, we’ve already had over 200 people murdered. And so those cases, as they come in, come in as fast as we can handle the older cases. And so until we get more prosecutors and until the courts try more these cases, we’re going to maintain that backlog. And the goal is get rid of it, get rid of these cases. Let’s try them. Let’s put them in front of juries and see what they say. Or if the defendants want to plead, let’s negotiate. And finally, if somebody is claiming their innocence and we find that that is provable with evidence, then we dismiss the cases. So there’s three possible outcomes. The most important thing for victims and public safety is that we get to those cases first.
Jeffers: And with Jocelyn’s case, there’s obviously the legal portion of this. There’s also the emotional, aspect of this as well. Today, the community is getting ready to pay their respects, to say goodbye to this 12 year old. Her family, as well as you work alongside, with them, if you can talk about what that process is like as they work to try to find justice for their daughter.
Ogg: So the Nungaray family showed up in force, more than 20 family members to support Jocelyn’s mother and grandparents. The that kind of family support is rare, and I think it’s given the mother strength to tell her story about her child and to make this meaningful so that it doesn’t continue to happen, and to make it meaningful means to raise the public’s awareness about this problem of people coming across our borders illegally and committing crimes. And I don’t know in terms of that family where they stand, but we walk them through the justice system, which is the process of how the accused are treated. That’s difficult for victims because the accused have all the rights. Their family member is dead. She can’t speak for herself. And so. They’re there to speak for her, and we’re there to provide support for the family as they go through the process. So telling them what to expect, being with them, having victims assistance coordinators, which our office greatly expanded the number of. That’s important. That’s somebody there to be with them and translate if necessary. If somebody doesn’t have total familiarity with the language. So I think that this process of helping victims through the worst thing that can possibly happen to a family is one of our most important jobs. Of course, as lawyers, we’re bound by the law and the evidence, and that’s how we’re going to handle the defendant. But adding this component of helping the victims family is really important in terms of the evolution of prosecution, and something that’s been very important to me in my career.
Jeffers: As the community kind of grapples are waiting for answers. They want to know what happens next. Can you just give us a brief synopsis, kind of walk us through? What we can anticipate next is in this case.
Ogg: Well, because Jocelyn was found bound and nude from the waist down. There’s a lot of testing that can be done and is being done in our forensic lab at the city of Houston. That’s the single most important factor right now. Of course, any video that’s available from other businesses in the area, other eyewitnesses that may have unwittingly seen these three individuals together. All of those things are where the investigation is probing. And so HPD detectives should be commended. They’ve done a great job following leads. But this case broke because another individual living at the time with the two defendants realized they had committed the murder and called a friend, a cousin who called the police. And I think the intervention of that person helped prevent these two defendants from fleeing. And so what I want the public to remember is you may not know what you know, but as soon as you become aware of it, for goodness sake, call the police. That is what will lead ultimately to justice for Jocelyn and the fact that these individuals were captured, that we’re going to be able to prove the case against them. And through science and technology, we hope to be able to upgrade the charge to capital murder where there is death penalty eligibility.
Jeffers: Well, Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg, we very much appreciate your perspective and your time on this really difficult case.
Ogg: Thank you so much for covering it. And our hearts go out. I know yours does too. To the family today, especially during the funeral.
Jeffers: A very difficult day for everyone involved. Thank you again for your time. We appreciate it.
