TX- Jocelyn Nungaray,12 strangled, left under bridge. Houston June 17, 2024

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
You may be correct. There are slick ways to side step the kidnapping charge. JN is not here to offer her side of the story. It appeared she went willingly with them at first. Perhaps they offered to walk her home. Once under the bridge, their true intent came to light. The creeps can say anything they want. They will try to say she was there willingly and that they thought she was older. In the end, I believe evidence will expose their lies and justice will eventually be served.
That she doesn't know them, she is 12, they are in their 20s, there are bite marks and scratches, all enough to show probable cause to charge kidnapping. Whether she is bound or not is totally irrelevant. she was held against her will. They don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to bring the charges, just probable cause. For the DA to not bring those charges is insinuating that she was under that bridge for 2 hours with them consensually. Stop and think about that. With one of the defendants talking about the kissing and her pants off. Consensual? She is 12. She is terrified. The DA is ignoring the kidnapping angle.
 
That she doesn't know them, she is 12, they are in their 20s, there are bite marks and scratches, all enough to show probable cause to charge kidnapping. Whether she is bound or not is totally irrelevant. she was held against her will. They don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt to bring the charges, just probable cause. For the DA to not bring those charges is insinuating that she was under that bridge for 2 hours with them consensually. Stop and think about that. With one of the defendants talking about the kissing and her pants off. Consensual? She is 12. She is terrified. The DA is ignoring the kidnapping angle.
I believe the charges will come. I also believe she initially went with them willingly because they said something to make her feel safe like “ let’s get you home safe”. I think by the time she became terrified, it was too late. She trusted them enough not to create a scene at the store and to walk away with them. That is not her fault. It is theirs. In my opinion, the bite and scratch marks are solid evidence, but am assuming creepo explained those away somehow. I don’t think her being bound is irrelevant. ( my opinion only). Kidnapping is specific. Strangulation may not constitute a kidnapping charge in the eyes of the law. Once again. Strictly my opinion. However, I have faith in the evidence. These two men need to pay the ultimate price for their evil acts.
 
I believe the charges will come. I also believe she initially went with them willingly because they said something to make her feel safe like “ let’s get you home safe”. I think by the time she became terrified, it was too late. She trusted them enough not to create a scene at the store and to walk away with them. That is not her fault. It is theirs. In my opinion, the bite and scratch marks are solid evidence, but am assuming creepo explained those away somehow. I don’t think her being bound is irrelevant. ( my opinion only). Kidnapping is specific. Strangulation may not constitute a kidnapping charge in the eyes of the law. Once again. Strictly my opinion. However, I have faith in the evidence. These two men need to pay the ultimate price for their evil acts.
Well, it is abundantly clear that they held her against her will under the bridge. That is kidnapping. That fits the Texas statute. There is probable cause that occurred. It doesn't matter if she is tied up, strangled, assaulted.
 
I believe the charges will come. I also believe she initially went with them willingly because they said something to make her feel safe like “ let’s get you home safe”. I think by the time she became terrified, it was too late. She trusted them enough not to create a scene at the store and to walk away with them. That is not her fault. It is theirs. In my opinion, the bite and scratch marks are solid evidence, but am assuming creepo explained those away somehow. I don’t think her being bound is irrelevant. ( my opinion only). Kidnapping is specific. Strangulation may not constitute a kidnapping charge in the eyes of the law. Once again. Strictly my opinion. However, I have faith in the evidence. These two men need to pay the ultimate price for their evil acts.
I believe that @PrairieWind is saying that restraint is not relevant because Texas' kidnapping statute (like most other states) makes a provision that "restraint" is non-consensual by "(B) any means, including acquiescence of the victim, if:
(i) the victim is a child who is less than 14 years of age or an incompetent person and the parent, guardian, or person or institution acting in loco parentis has not acquiesced in the movement or confinement." Restraint is thus implied.

Texas Kidnapping Statute
See: PENAL CODE CHAPTER 20. KIDNAPPING, UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT, ANDSMUGGLING OF PERSONS

Texas Romeo and Juliet Statute:
See: PENAL CODE CHAPTER 21. SEXUAL OFFENSES
 
Last edited:
I believe that @PrairieWind is saying that restraint is not relevant because Texas' kidnapping statute (like most other states) makes a provision that "restraint" is non-consensual "(B) any means, including acquiescence of the victim, if:
(i) the victim is a child who is less than 14 years of age or an incompetent person and the parent, guardian, or person or institution acting in loco parentis has not acquiesced in the movement or confinement." Restraint is thus implied.

Texas Kidnapping Statute
See: PENAL CODE CHAPTER 20. KIDNAPPING, UNLAWFUL RESTRAINT, ANDSMUGGLING OF PERSONS

Texas Romeo and Juliet Statute:
See: PENAL CODE CHAPTER 21. SEXUAL OFFENSES
I understand what both you and Prairie Wind are saying. I truly do. I am just not ready to believe that the DA is trying to diminish the punishment purposely because of her personal beliefs………yet. Time may change my mind on that. I want to believe the DA is waiting for rock solid evidence that will make the death penalty stick like glue.
 
"The men were arrested on Thursday, June 20,
after investigators searched their home

and allegedly found evidence related to Jocelyn’s death."

What does it mean?
Did they rob her?
Or does it refer to their clothes seen in cctv?

 

" 'Murderer!’

Jocelyn Nungaray’s family

lashes out

during second accused killer’s first court appearance.


His defense attorneys meanwhile claimed Martinez-Rangel does not have a previous criminal history
and has two children, ages 5 and 2,
but it’s unclear if they live in Houston or in Venezuela.

However,
he does have family here and was requesting to have his bond lowered.
:oops:

A judge gave him a $10 million bond.

As Martinez-Rangel was escorted out of court,
one of Jocelyn’s family members shouted
'Murderer'
and
'I hope they kill your children'
in Spanish.
......


During a press conference Monday,
Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg said the current charges they face
do not make them eligible for the death penalty.

'Our laws treat the age of victims differently,
and they’ve changed where they draw the line',
she explained.

'[It] used to be children under six.
If they were murdered,
that created an underlying offense that would support death penalty and capital murder.

That law was expanded to 10 years old and under,
and then further expanded from 10 to 15.

If the victim was 10 to 15 years old,
yet the death penalty was taken off the table by the legislature,
and instead they suggested that life without parole would be the appropriate charge.

But age is not the only consideration in this case or any case,
the underlying actions of the criminals.

This victim was found,
you know, bound and without clothing from the waist down in the water.
And we just think that there’s a good possibility.

We hope that there’s evidence that remains to be tested'."

 
Last edited:
"The men were arrested on Thursday, June 20,
after investigators searched their home

and allegedly found evidence related to Jocelyn’s death."

What does it mean?
Did they rob her?
Or does it refer to their clothes seen in cctv?

The bite and scratch marks maybe?
 

" 'Murderer!’

Jocelyn Nungaray’s family

lashes out

during second accused killer’s first court appearance.


His defense attorneys meanwhile claimed Martinez-Rangel does not have a previous criminal history
and has two children, ages 5 and 2,
but it’s unclear if they live in Houston or in Venezuela.

However,
he does have family here and was requesting to have his bond lowered.
:oops:

A judge gave him a $10 million bond.

As Martinez-Rangel was escorted out of court,
one of Jocelyn’s family members shouted
'Murderer'
and
'I hope they kill your children'
in Spanish.
......


During a press conference Monday,
Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg said the current charges they face
do not make them eligible for the death penalty.

'Our laws treat the age of victims differently,
and they’ve changed where they draw the line',
she explained.

'[It] used to be children under six.
If they were murdered,
that created an underlying offense that would support death penalty and capital murder.

That law was expanded to 10 years old and under,
and then further expanded from 10 to 15.

If the victim was 10 to 15 years old,
yet the death penalty was taken off the table by the legislature,
and instead they suggested that life without parole would be the appropriate charge.

But age is not the only consideration in this case or any case,
the underlying actions of the criminals.

This victim was found,
you know, bound and without clothing from the waist down in the water.
And we just think that there’s a good possibility.

We hope that there’s evidence that remains to be tested'."

I know JN’s family is in immense pain but shouting “I hope they kill your children” to the accused is horrible.
 
Taken from the link above:
" Harris County District Attorney Kim Ogg said the current charges the suspects face does not make them eligible for the death penalty."
I am trying to understand this statement. It seems clear that they are eligible for DP on several avenues. I know that DA Kim Ogg is anti-death penalty, so she is likely looking for reasons to NOT seek it. But in making statement like this, it really insinuates some serious victim blaming here.

Seriously. They gang raped a 12 year old girl, tied her up, and strangled her.

The death penalty is made for people like this. Heinous on every level.
 
The bite and scratch marks maybe?
Of course!
Thanks!

I thought about items,
and it is written "evidence"

But it says:

"Searched their home
and allegedly found evidence".
 
Last edited:
I understand what both you and Prairie Wind are saying. I truly do. I am just not ready to believe that the DA is trying to diminish the punishment purposely because of her personal beliefs………yet. Time may change my mind on that. I want to believe the DA is waiting for rock solid evidence that will make the death penalty stick like glue.
I understand you comments but you need to understand that DA Kim Ogg campaigned on a platform of no more death penalty. She doesn't believe in it. She was just defeated in a primary by an even more progressive candidate. I don't think DA Ogg wants a dp on the table. She could have said DP was applicable and we wouldn't have even had a hearing on bail amounts. But she can drag this out to a point where regardless of who takes over as the new DA in November, the DP will be off the table.
Also, would be interested to know if she has contacted the Venezualan government to assist in defense. she is required.
 
"The men were arrested on Thursday, June 20,
after investigators searched their home

and allegedly found evidence related to Jocelyn’s death."

What does it mean?
Did they rob her?
Or does it refer to their clothes seen in cctv?

I was thinking their clothes. If she bit him and scratched, she fought, maybe even some of her own blood ended up on them. Maybe they took home a trophy like underwear or jewelry. All just my guessing.
 
But are we sure these 2 are the perps?

Would they be so blatant?
So oblivious of cctv linking them to this crime?

Was the girl meeting someone that night?

RIP to the victim :(
Condolences to family.
moo CCTV doesn't seem to be a huge deterrent. IDK if when this occurs the perpetrators feel confident that no one will be able to identify them, or no one will turn them in, or what the rationale. jmoo
 
I believe the charges will come. I also believe she initially went with them willingly because they said something to make her feel safe like “ let’s get you home safe”. I think by the time she became terrified, it was too late. She trusted them enough not to create a scene at the store and to walk away with them. That is not her fault. It is theirs. In my opinion, the bite and scratch marks are solid evidence, but am assuming creepo explained those away somehow. I don’t think her being bound is irrelevant. ( my opinion only). Kidnapping is specific. Strangulation may not constitute a kidnapping charge in the eyes of the law. Once again. Strictly my opinion. However, I have faith in the evidence. These two men need to pay the ultimate price for their evil acts.
They asked her for directions, and I think they preyed on her helpful, friendly nature. I think they asked her to show them how to get to place A, and that's why she went. Just my speculation only.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
215
Guests online
1,506
Total visitors
1,721

Forum statistics

Threads
598,489
Messages
18,082,211
Members
230,643
Latest member
jordanstar
Back
Top