Federal jury rejects Bovino murder plot after attorney calls on it to 'stop the overreaching government'

Federal authorities slapped all kinds of sinister labels on Chicago’s Juan Espinoza Martinez when they arrested him last fall, and they did it for all the world to hear.

They called him a “high-ranking member of the Latin Kings.” They called him “depraved.” They even called him a “thug” as they accused him of offering $10,000 for the murder of U.S. Border Patrol Cmdr. Gregory Bovino.

But Thursday, a federal jury called Espinoza Martinez “not guilty.” In doing so, it put an end to one of the most contentious prosecutions to result from “Operation Midway Blitz.”

The group of regular citizens, led by a teacher who served as the foreperson, answered a call from defense attorney Dena Singer. She urged them in closing arguments to “stand up to the overreaching government.”

“You have the power here,” she told them. “Your words now matter. You have the power to stop the overreaching government. … Don’t let them bully. Use your voice. And while the agents and the government did not want to listen to Juan’s voice, they will listen to yours.”

After deliberating for about three hours, the jury acquitted Espinoza Martinez of one count of murder-for-hire, which carried a maximum of 10 years in prison. They did so after hearing how Bovino last fall became the face of immigration enforcement in Chicago.

Espinoza Martinez, 37, sat stoically in his chair after the verdict was read, but he appeared to be holding back emotions as he briefly lifted his eyes to the ceiling. When the jury left the courtroom, he shared big hugs with Singer and her co-counsel, Jonathan Bedi.

Still, his future remains uncertain. His lawyers have acknowledged an immigration detainer exists, telling a judge it’s likely to be acted upon. The question was not addressed Thursday after the verdict, and Bedi and Singer left the Dirksen Federal Courthouse without commenting.

Several jurors also declined to speak to a Chicago Sun-Times reporter as they hustled out of the building.

U.S. Attorney Andrew Boutros’ office did not comment. But Stephen Miller, President Donald Trump’s deputy chief of staff and an architect of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s deportation campaign, reacted to the news on social media by insisting that “leftist judges and juries are empowering violent insurrection against the government in an effort to stop ICE from removing criminal alien invaders.”

Espinoza Martinez is one of 31 known defendants charged in Chicago’s federal court with non-immigration crimes tied to the Trump administration’s aggressive deportation campaign last fall. With Thursday’s acquittal of Espinoza Martinez, 15 of them have now been cleared. At least three of those dismissals resulted from so-called "no bills," where a grand jury found insufficient evidence or probable cause to return an indictment. That was virtually unheard of until recently.

Charges against the remaining 11 defendants were dropped for various other reasons. None of the cases have led to a conviction, so far.

Espinoza Martinez is the first defendant prosecutors have taken to trial, though. The case against him evolved drastically after criminal charges were first filed in October, when Bedi and Singer insisted on a speedy trial. Prosecutors pressed forward even after U.S. District Judge Joan Lefkow ruled crucial evidence couldn’t be seen by the jury.

The original criminal complaint cited a “source of information,” now known to be 44-year-old Adrian Jimenez, who called Espinoza Martinez a “ranking member of the Latin Kings.” A Homeland Security press release also called Espinoza Martinez a “Latin Kings gang member.”

But earlier this month, First Assistant U.S. Attorney Jason Yonan and Assistant U.S. Attorney Minje Shin acknowledged they would not try to prove Espinoza Martinez’s gang membership at trial.

That prompted Lefkow to bar gang evidence from the case. She wrote in an order that, “without evidence showing that [Espinoza Martinez] is a member of the Latin Kings or that the Latin Kings instructed [Espinoza Martinez] to send the alleged murder-for-hire information, the prejudicial nature of such testimony outweighs any probative value.”

In an emergency hearing hours after that ruling last week, Yonan told Lefkow that “nearly every piece of evidence in this case touches, in some fashion, on the Latin Kings.”

But the trial still kicked off. The feds called only three witnesses Wednesday, who testified over the course of nearly three hours, combined. Then, in closing arguments Thursday, Yonan told jurors that Espinoza Martinez was “angry” about immigration enforcement last fall in Little Village, where he lived.

“He was fixated, and obsessed, with Gregory Bovino,” Yonan told the jury.

Prosecutors told jurors about a message Espinoza Martinez sent over Snapchat to Jimenez in early October. It followed a picture of Bovino and read, “2k on info cuando lo agarren,” “10k if u take him down,” and “LK … on him.”

Jimenez testified that he understood that to mean “$2,000 when they grab him … $10,000 if you kill him … Latin Kings are on him.”

Homeland Security Investigations special agents Chris Perugini and Donald Adams also took the stand to discuss Espinoza Martinez’s interview with federal agents and additional messages allegedly sent by Espinoza Martinez.

Those messages included the words “10k for his head” below a picture of Bovino, along with “dead or alive” and “s--t serious.”

Shin told the jury in closings Thursday that “nobody was pointing the finger” at Espinoza Martinez “until he made the choice — until he used his words.”

“The crime here was complete the moment he sent those words,” Shin argued. “Because he had the intent that a murder take place when he sent those words.”

But Singer told the jury, “the government has failed to prove their case. You know it.”

No money exchanged hands, she said. No weapons were purchased. Social media, she said, “is riddled with things that aren’t true. … with people sending and sharing things.” There was no evidence that Espinoza Martinez intended for the murder to happen, or that he took a “substantial step,” she said.

“You should demand that there’s other evidence before you can convict somebody for this,” Singer said.

The defense attorney put instructions about the burden of proof on display in the courtroom. Then, she pointed her finger all around the room and said, “these are protections all of us have.”

“Not just them,” she said, pointing only toward the prosecutors. “All of us in this courtroom.”

“These are protections that protect every single one of us,” she told the jury.

“The presumption of innocence.”

Contributing: Anna Savchenko and Sophie Sherry