A Santa Clara County judge now holds the future of ex-UFC heavyweight champion Cain Velasquez. Velasquez recently renounced his claim to a jury trial, ascending to a ‘no contest’ statement for accusations of attempted murder among eight other allegations. The ex-MMA combatant is accused of conducting a ‘vigilante shooting rampage’ in an attempt to assassinate an individual accused of child molestation in the year 2022.
Judge Arthur Bocanegra will preside over the case and carries considerable discretion in determining Velasquez’s penalty, slated for adjudication in October. A plea form signed by Velasquez, as obtained by local station KRON4 this Tuesday, reveals he is acquainted with the maximum punishment warranted by his charges. Velasquez acknowledges a potential state prison term of up to 40 years and 4 months, reaching up to a life sentence.
The extent of the former UFC champion’s penalty will be contingent on the judge’s decision. Velasquez could face the direst penalty, or alternatively, Judge Bocanegra could lean towards leniency, thus freeing Velasquez without any incarceration. As explained by Prosecutor Aaron French to KRON4, Velasquez could be granted probation, serving no supplementary detention period as a minimum outcome.
The district attorney’s office has made no agreements with Velasquez that set boundaries for the harshness of the penalty. In August, Velasquez was incriminated for attempted homicide, opening fire on an occupied vehicle and assault with a firearm plus a deadly weapon. Also, he was charged with willful discharge of a firearm from a vehicle.
Velasquez’s intentions were delineated by the investigators as a personal effort to serve justice. He allegedly shot at an individual, Harry Goularte, who was suspected of child molestation in Morgan Hill on February 28th, 2022. According to prosecutors, Velasquez’s aimed shots proved to be inaccurate, leaving Goularte unscathed.
Paul Bender, Goularte’s father-in-law, was dismally victim to the misdirected bullets but thankfully managed to survive. A few days prior to this mishap, one of Velasquez’s children reported being victimized by Goularte within a San Martin daycare, as indicated by court files. Goularte was subsequently apprehended but was swiftly absolved from detention.
A legal representative for Velasquez insinuated that witnessing Goularte without restraints in the community, potentially continuing his abuse of other children, greatly instigated Velasquez. District Attorney Jeff Rosen condemned Velasquez’s conduct, stating, ‘The defendant took upon himself the roles of judge, jury, and executioner, imperiling innocent nearby persons.’
In Rosen’s opinion, Velasquez should have entrusted the criminal justice system to act instead of taking law enforcement into his own hands. Velasquez is currently spared from custody, remaining on bail as he apprehensively awaits his sentencing trial. According to the court files, his hearing has been scheduled for 9 a.m. on the 18th of October in Santa Clara County Hall of Justice.
Harry Goularte, a 43-year-old from San Martin, faces charges related to child molestation. His court appearance has been arranged for November 13th for setting the date of his jury trial. Goularte has testified his innocence by pleading not guilty to all the charges leveled against him.
As per the allegations, Velasquez was driven by a misguided sense of repairing a wrong and safeguarding his child. This protective vigor, however, led him to actions that disregarded the law and risked the lives of innocents and in particular, Goularte’s father-in-law.
The wide spectrum of consequences lying ahead for Velasquez underscores the serious repercussions that individuals face when they bypass the legal system and take matters into their own hands. Engaging in self-justice practices can lead to potential danger for others and severe legal penalties, as exemplified in this case.
This matter serves as a grim reminder of the adversity that victims and their families endure during such dire situations. The ensuing chain of events built a waiting period of uncertainty filled with heightened emotions, specifically for those involved in the case.
Notably, this case emphasizes the importance of trusting the judicial system to carry out fair justice. Despite the urge to take immediate action in the face of perceived injustice, respect for the law must be maintained.
In conclusion, the coming months will witness decisive developments in these case proceedings, whether it concerns Velasquez’s sentencing or Goularte’s upcoming trial. This case accentuates the gravity of both the allegations at hand and the potential consequences of not adhering to the stipulated legal protocols.