Yolanda Saldívar is serving a life sentence in prison for the 1995 murder of singer Selena Quintanilla-Pérez. Although she is eligible for parole in 2025, RadarOnline.com can exclusively reveal she wants out from behind bars now by demanding a new trial.
In court papers obtained from the United States District Court’s Waco Division, Saldívar, who is incarcerated in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Institutional Division at the Mountain View Unit, filed a Second Writ of Habeas Corpus on March 28, 2019.
Saldívar, 58, claimed the prosecutor, Carlos Valdez, had and has held exculpatory material evidence, which is evidence favorable to the defendant, without disclosing it to the defense or the jury during the trial. She claimed after 23 years, he presented the evidence to the public in a Spanish media interview.
She claimed that nowhere in the State’s Exhibit Index were a pair of white high top Reebox Tennis Shoes and/or a Black Baseball Cap introduced as evidence to the jury, which she alleged were worn by the Grammy-winning songstress, not her.
“The Petitioner paraphrases Mr. Valdez’s media interview where he stated that he and the defense counsel, the late Mr. Douglas Tinker, discussed what [evidence] would or would not be introduced to the jury,” the filing read. “How could this be? It is the jury, no less, that would decide the fate of the Petitioner, between [life] in prison and [freedom]. The jury, NOT the defense or the prosecutor is the trier of fact of all relevant material evidence and they alone should and DID determine between conviction and acquittal.”
Saldívar, who claimed the shooting was accidental, asked that if the shoes and blood stains on them would prove she committed the “alleged crime,” then why did the prosecution exclude the evidence? That is, “unless there was a nefarious attempt to obscure a verdict against the Petitioner.”
She continued to allege that there is “no doubt” the prosecutor “impaired the verity of the evidence by not only withholding the evidence, but claiming that those tennis shoes belonged to the defendant, inciting and infecting the public’s sediment even more against the Petitioner before, during and now with his recent media interview.”
Saldívar also claimed Valdez, “knew those tennis shoes belonged to the victim and withholding them helped get the conviction of the Petitioner practicing a travesty of justice to the rule of law and violating the constitutional rights of the Petitioner.”
She claimed the shoes matter because the Court of Appeals “opinioned” that she shot Quintanilla-Perez in the back as she walked toward the door of Saldívar’s room. This would indicate that the shooting occurred inside, not outside.
“The prosecutor, Mr. Valdez, presented evidence of the trail of blood he states the victim left behind as she ran 130 yards (390 feet) from the room to the front lobby of the motel,” the court papers read. “The ‘withholding’ of the victim’s shoes (i.e. White Reebok Tennis Shoes) are of a great consequence because if it is as Mr. Valdez claimed in his March 16, 2018 interview that the Petitioner ‘stepped’ on victim’s blood as she followed the victim, then ‘intent’ would have been proven or disproven. For 23 years, the jury nor the defense knew that such shoes existed.”
She continued, “In his media interview, (paraphrasing Mr. Valdez) claimed that the ‘exertion,’ post right perforated subclavian artery injury, that the victim exhibited while running is what killed the victim. Had the ‘tennis shoes’ been presented as evidence, they could have proven the extent of the victim’s blood loss as an artery injury would have produced an enormous amounts of blood profusing out of the victim into her shoes. The jury never got to deliberate this crucial evidence.”
The case was dismissed without prejudice because the Petitioner filed the petition in district court and must seek permission from the Fifth Circuit.
Saldívar, the founder of Quintanilla-Pérez’s fan club, helped manage the singer’s Texas-based boutiques. Quintanilla-Pérez’s father began hearing complaints from fan club members that they did not receive items they had paid for. They also heard from employees that she had been stealing money from the San Antonio store.
On March 31, the “I Could Fall In Love” singer met with Saldívar, who claimed she’d been raped. Quintanilla-Pérez took her to the hospital for an exam, but the hospital wouldn’t perform a full examination on her because she was not a resident of Corpus Christi and was not in the jurisdiction of the alleged attack.
The two returned to the Days Inn after leaving the hospital. Quintanilla-Pérez asked for financial records. While she was leaving, Saldívar shot her in the back.
The “Bidi Bidi Bom Bom” songstress made her way to the lobby. She named Saldívar as the shooter as she collapsed, motel staff claimed. She was pronounced dead shortly after arriving to the hospital. She was 23.
Saldívar then threatened suicide in an over nine-hour long standoff with police before she arrested.
She pled not guilty. She was convicted and was sentenced to life in prison without the possibly of parole until 2025.
The post Selena Quintanilla’s Killer Demands New Trial, Accuses Prosecutor Of Hiding Evidence appeared first on RadarOnline.