Man charged with murder gets probation

Andrew Paul Chavez is a free man, following a decision Wednesday by District Judge Henry Quintero to dismiss an open count of murder against him and accept a plea agreement of voluntary manslaughter. Full Story
DUH

United States

#21 Sep 7, 2008
Let us just go in this direction; most all of you keep pointing fingers in Kellens' direction and his history, even to the point of telling others to look up his FAMILIES records. Well, why don't you take a peak at Andrew Chavez' record at http://www.nmcourts.com ?

I also knew Kellen personally. As a matter of fact I am good friends with most of his family and I do not commit crimes am not crazy. I miss Kellen too. He was always very sweet to me and was there when I needed someone to talk to. I do realize that he was not a perfect man but he was not a monster like everyone is trying to make him sound. I can remember taking him to drop off job applications one day and that very same day he had himself a job. If he was so horrible why would someone hire him on the spot. I also witnessed him climb up a tree to save his baby cousins kitten.

I really feel sorry for those of you who take the side of a murderer. What are you going to do when you come face to face with Chavez on the street? Will you embrace him? Or turn the other way. I guess we will see how you truly feel about this when one of your friends or family members gets murdered and the murderer gets off.
christy

Tucson, AZ

#22 Sep 7, 2008
elkstine wrote:
One less Gangbanger in Silver City.
U didn't even know Kellen so keep your comment's to yourself!!!!!
christy

Tucson, AZ

#23 Sep 7, 2008
No one really knows my family to be calling kookoo!!! Kellen wasn't as bad as everyone says! Just a kid with problems! The cousin's KILLER should of gotten more than a slap on the hand!!
christy

Tucson, AZ

#24 Sep 7, 2008
Hmmmmmm wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry for Mr Lucero but he is one less gang banger and one less person we need to worry about..
Did You know Kellen personally? I don't think so! My cousin had some problems but he was there for anybody when they needed him and the sweetest person! Really look at his murderers background and see if it is fair that he got of with a slap on the hand!! I wouldn't even call it that i call it a kiss on the cheek for killing my cousin!!
christy

Tucson, AZ

#25 Sep 7, 2008
SO sure wrote:
Well, Andrew isn't going to ROT in a cell like you want him to because he has a chance at life. THe only one who IS "ROTTING" (with emphasis) away right now is Kellen, but out of his own negligence! It's obvious YOU weren't following the case, because he had the tire iron with him not in the truck and he also had a GUN, a KNIFE, a CHAIN, and DRUGS. What the hell was he planning to do with those? Good thing Andrew didn't wait around to wonder about it! The one who should have been sent away to prison was Kellen for all the crimes he committed in his past and maybe, just maybe, he wouldn't have been out looking for someone to jump in the middle of the night like a psycho, drug addicted drunk!!!!!!!! TOO BAD WE CAN'T HEAR KElLEN'S SIDE OF THE STORY, but then again he was known for being a liar too so who knows what he would have come up with........
So what you are saying is that it was ok for kellen to die because u are assuming (like as if you know him personally) that he was a liar? I swear you are acting like u were there when everything happened that night and also the whole time in the court room! Thanks to people like you for a world with no justice! He was my cousin and I will always love him! You should rot for having any say when u didn't even know him!
christy

Tucson, AZ

#26 Sep 7, 2008
SO sure wrote:
Well, Andrew isn't going to ROT in a cell like you want him to because he has a chance at life. THe only one who IS "ROTTING" (with emphasis) away right now is Kellen, but out of his own negligence! It's obvious YOU weren't following the case, because he had the tire iron with him not in the truck and he also had a GUN, a KNIFE, a CHAIN, and DRUGS. What the hell was he planning to do with those? Good thing Andrew didn't wait around to wonder about it! The one who should have been sent away to prison was Kellen for all the crimes he committed in his past and maybe, just maybe, he wouldn't have been out looking for someone to jump in the middle of the night like a psycho, drug addicted drunk!!!!!!!! TOO BAD WE CAN'T HEAR KElLEN'S SIDE OF THE STORY, but then again he was known for being a liar too so who knows what he would have come up with........


Ya you know it all!!!
Montague

Delavan, WI

#27 Sep 8, 2008
christy wrote:
<quoted text>
Did You know Kellen personally? I don't think so! My cousin had some problems but he was there for anybody when they needed him and the sweetest person! Really look at his murderers background and see if it is fair that he got of with a slap on the hand!! I wouldn't even call it that i call it a kiss on the cheek for killing my cousin!!
Background does not factor into the decision made in a criminal trial. Otherwise, a babtist preacher who boinks a 12 year old boy, would not be convicted using your logic.

Background only factors in during the sentencing hearing.

You can choose to disregard reality and use opinion to think of what should have happened, it's your right to live in an alternate fantasy universe. However, the facts of the incident were presented at a criminal trial and none of the past is part of those facts.
DUH

Silver City, NM

#28 Sep 8, 2008
Montague wrote:
<quoted text>Background does not factor into the decision made in a criminal trial. Otherwise, a babtist preacher who boinks a 12 year old boy, would not be convicted using your logic.
Background only factors in during the sentencing hearing.
You can choose to disregard reality and use opinion to think of what should have happened, it's your right to live in an alternate fantasy universe. However, the facts of the incident were presented at a criminal trial and none of the past is part of those facts.
I suppose that preacher served a sentence for what he did-Chavez is running free. What Christi is trying to say is that Chavez murdered Kellen and should pay the price. I suppose you also believe that the 12 year old boy was to blame for what was done to him. You really should think about what you are saying before you make yourself look so ignorant.
Montague

Delavan, WI

#29 Sep 9, 2008
DUH wrote:
<quoted text>
Chavez is running free. What Christi is trying to say is that Chavez murdered Kellen and should pay the price.
And what I am trying to say is that in the real world, the state IS the VICTIM when it comes to crimes and criminal prosecution and if the state don't want to go all the way with a murder trial, the state don't haff ta if'n it don't wanta.

Scroll and paste the state statute for murder and show me where the word "victim" appears, it don't say nothing that reads close to saying, "whoever kills a murder victim dead, owes the murder victim something-something". It don't say that anywhere in the state statutes, it probably reads "whoever through pre-meditation causes the death of another, is guilty of first degree murder".

Therefore, Christi has two choices. Either she overthrows the government of New Mexico and starts her own criminal justice system or she files a civil suit for wrongful death and if she's lucky enough to win over a jury she will be awarded a judgement of "should pay the price".
Montague

Delavan, WI

#30 Sep 9, 2008
DUH wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose that preacher served a sentence for what he did.
Listen up Gloria, two things first, then some other stuff later: That was a rhetorical preacher and you missed the point.

Whether you or Christi "feel" it should be, past innocence, past guilt and "opinions" of people are not admissible as any kind of fact or evidence for the purposes of a criminal trial.

The criminal trial is only about that exact crime and whether or not the defendant is guilty of that exact crime. The only time past behavior becomes part of the process is when a sentencing hearing is being conducted and that hearing comes AFTER a conviction at a criminal trial.

Are ya following me so far, Gloria? Did ya figure out that the feelings of frustration regarding what happened are actually caused by not knowing and accepting the difference between the words "fact" and "opinion"?

She's entitled to "feel" and "opine" all she wants, but if she ever wants to feel less frustrated about what actually happened, she's going to have to learn the facts behind criminal process and the facts of what happened in that case.
Montague

Delavan, WI

#31 Sep 9, 2008
DUH wrote:
<quoted text>
I suppose you also believe that the 12 year old boy was to blame for what was done to him.
one of the laws of learning is repetition, so once again Gloria, it was a rhetorical statement about the boy and the preacher.

Regardless, if in fact there was a preacher and the preacher molested the 12 year old, the state is the victim. The criminal complaint will read: "STATE v. PREACHER DUDE". The alleged law broken will be the state's law and that law will read something similar to this, "Whoever has sexual contact with a person who has not yet attained the age of 16 is guilty of a Class D felony".

That law doesn't call the little boy a victim because the state is the victim...and when the state calls witnesses up, they call them witnesses, don't they? Hmmmmm? Does the little boy sit next to the prosecutor during the trial? No, he sits with mommy and the rest of the witnesses, right? Hmmmmm?

Now, if our hypothetical little boy's parents or estate wants to sue the preacher after he's found guilty by the state, they can go get their "should pay the price" out the man and sue him in civil court as plaintiffs.

That's how it works and if that still don't make no sense to you, it's how it worked exactly in the O.J. Simpson case.
Silver City

Silver City, NM

#32 Sep 9, 2008
Input wrote:
It looks to us that no one followed the case to know the details and the circumstances that surround the incident that night. The last time we checked its our god given right to bear arms and defend ourselves especially when a drunk, meth addicted, self destructive bully, such as Mr. Kellen Lucero pulls out a tire iron at an innocent person in the middle of the night and starts shouting "I'm going to kill you!", for no reason at all!! Any person in their right mind will automatically defend themselves against a person like that. I know we would. Thank god we keep a gun near us because we all know their are crazy people like Mr. Lucero in this town who frankly don't care about the well being of others.
God given right?? yes we do have a right to bear arms and defend ourselves. whether it was 3 or 4 shots to the back goes a little beyond defense.
Montague

Delavan, WI

#33 Sep 10, 2008
Silver City wrote:
<quoted text>
whether it was 3 or 4 shots to the back goes a little beyond defense.
that depends on the situation itself and what the person claiming self defense as a defense can articulte.

Let's say I'm cleaining my machine gun at my dinner table and a crazy looking person suddenly enters my home and shouts, "dude, I'm here to kills ya really good and I'm going to turn around right now and reach in your gun vault and grab a rifle and turn back around, point it at ya and shoot it at ya 'till I kills ya real good with it!!!".

Then let's say the intruder makes that turning lunge toward the gun vault and the gun vault has 20 guns in it, the status of which I am unsure.

Then let's say while I was cleaning the machine gun I had taken the 30 round magazine out and it was laying on the table in front of me, so I insert the magazine while yelling to the intruder, "Stop! Don't!".

Then let's say for some reason the intruder doesn't stop, so I dump about 1/3 of the magazine into the back of the intruder before he has a chance to turn around and shoot me with a rifle from the gun vault.

Do you think that shooting that intruder in the back is act of self-defense?
Anyone get this

Jacksonville, FL

#34 Sep 21, 2008
Funny thing is Kellen should've been carrying a gun like Andrew. Since Andrew was appearantly planning on shooting him with the pistol he brought. Gang related, "colors" Hmmm?
Also a funny thing, a Judge that was a prior attorney for who? Answer: Andrew. So Andrew gets probation. First of all your guilty of something or your innocent when it comes to shooting someone. Probation? Purpose? Murder or Self-defense, right?
Shooting in the back multiple times as someone is retreating is NOT Self-defense. Someone walking away from someone even with a tire iron in hand (if he had it) and getting repeatedly shot in the back is NOT SELF DEFENSE PERIOD. This is a perfect example of injustice and oversight I've seen in a long time. Regardless if Kellen had a record, did this or that, you come to an investigation looking at what you have before you. Not knowing the intentions of both before hand you have the obvious forensics. Someone was shot repeatedly in the back(4 times)shows everything but self-defense.
So OBVIOUS

Jacksonville, FL

#35 Sep 21, 2008
I thought people usually defended themselves if there was an actual threat. Apparrantly, Andrew Chavez didn't have a single bruise, scrape, or mark from that so-called tire iron. Also, if a "real" man is being attacked, he'll match force with force... for instance, you don't shoot someone that doesn't have a gun! Plus, if you look up the court record, Kellen did NOT have a gun in his truck http://www.nmcourts.gov/ , therefore, the person that is making up lies about the case and about Kellen is CALLED OUT & it is evident that ANDREW CHAVEZ IS A MURDERER. Kellen should have had a jury in his ruling. Instead, he had a corrupt, small-town judge hand out unsupervised probation to a wannabe gangster thug who dressed up as a cowboy for his trial.
Who carries a GUN in small-town SILVER CITY, New Mexico... at 3 a.m.? It's not like Andrew Chavez was walking the crime infested streets of Los Angeles or New York! I heard he moved out of town like a shameful guilty man would.
Montague

Delavan, WI

#36 Sep 23, 2008
So OBVIOUS wrote:
I thought people usually defended themselves if there was an actual threat. Apparrantly, Andrew Chavez didn't have a single bruise, scrape, or mark from that so-called tire iron. Also, if a "real" man is being attacked, he'll match force with force... for instance, you don't shoot someone that doesn't have a gun!
I think something primarily OBVIOUS, is that you're easily confused by your own opinion to the point that facts would only confuse you more.
Frances Gonzales

El Paso, TX

#37 Sep 23, 2008
Andrew Chavez had some time to plant the tire iron before he went running to mommy, almost everyone has one in their vehicle. His family can go on and on how it is okay to shoot someone 5 times. I'm glad his dad lived to see his son a murderer. Self defense what a joke, for all we know Kellen asked the punk if he needed a ride. This little wanna be gang member had to carry a gun. GOOD people just don't go around carring a gun. Kellen had a family, love of life, and didn't deserve to die like that. Andrew's family calls Kellen a bully, a drug addict, what cruelness. A FREE MAN only because Andrew keeps believing his story. How horrible he has to tell his son or daughter he killed a man in cold blood. Andrew Chavez is a wanna be gang banger and now a murderer that is all he'll ever be. We've had enough of your he's a free man get over it. Quit thanking god we keep a gun near us. God never had a gun.
Montague

Delavan, WI

#38 Sep 23, 2008
Frances Gonzales wrote:
Quit thanking god we keep a gun near us. God never had a gun.
Why would god need a gun? He's got like 20 tenticles and three rows of teeth and one big bull dork eye ball that he keeps in a pyramid, with man eating capability like that, a gun would be overkill.
christy

Tucson, AZ

#39 Sep 23, 2008
Montague wrote:
<quoted text>Why would god need a gun? He's got like 20 tenticles and three rows of teeth and one big bull dork eye ball that he keeps in a pyramid, with man eating capability like that, a gun would be overkill.
You must be REALLY REALLY bored to respond to EVERY comment! For all u could be Andrew himself commenting back! Or maybe even a MURDERER like Andrew was! Most of your comments don't even make sense! Only murderers with corrupt minds speak like you!
You go girl

Albuquerque, NM

#40 Sep 25, 2008
Alright Christi!!! It is about time that someone commented back to that guy who seems to know everything about this case. Maybe he was there!!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Santa Clara Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Messianic Jews say they are persecuted in Israel (Jun '08) 9 hr J RULES 71,185
Do you have VERIZON and you didn't have service... Dec 13 yankeedudell 2
Experience Victorian Christmas tonight at Silve... (Dec '09) Dec 9 billie 4
Dr. Twana Sparks (Dec '09) Dec 9 MSGT Don 49
* the Silver City Daily Press * Dec 9 billie 1
Getting into the spirit of Christmas, a look at... Dec 9 billie 1
Grant Co.---rotten corner of NM (Sep '11) Dec 7 Insect Trust 44
Santa Clara Dating
Find my Match
More from around the web

Santa Clara People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Santa Clara News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Santa Clara

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]

NFL Latest News

Updated 1:21 pm PST

NFL 1:21PM
Peyton Manning: I plan to be back with Broncos
ESPN 1:22 PM
Peyton intent on playing for Broncos in 2015
Bleacher Report 1:40 PM
Bold Predictions for the 49ers' Week 17 Matchup
Bleacher Report 3:06 PM
Peyton: I Plan on Being Back in 2015
NBC Sports 3:10 PM
Rookie Thomas becomes 4th Cardinals QB of season - NBC Sports