Detective says in trial San Antonio woman was not a threat when shot by officers

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (CN) — A San Antonio police detective testified Tuesday that a woman in the midst of a mental health episode wouldn’t have been a danger to three police officers who later fatally shot her — remarks that drew scoffs and laughter from defense attorneys in the high-profile murder trial.

Detective Ronald Soto, the lead investigator in the case, told jurors on the 12th day of testimony in a trial over the June 23, 2023, death of Melissa Perez that he was “shocked” the three officers charged did not use less-lethal force during the confrontation.

Under cross-examination by defense attorney Jason Goss, Soto conceded that Perez swung a hammer close to an officer’s head, wasn’t assaulted by police and that she was a methamphetamine user.

“You’d agree that [the officer] was being met with the threat of deadly force?” Goss asked.

“Yes — his mind, he feels like he’s in danger there,” Soto said. He also admitted that none of the three officers charged in Perez’s death knew they were responding to a mental health call. But the day’s testimony grew even more contentious when Soto claimed that Perez “was never going to let go of that hammer.”

“I didn’t know this was funny,” Soto said after several defense attorneys chuckled at his response. “That hammer is all she had to protect her home — that’s it. She never once showed that she was going to throw that hammer at anyone.”

“Nobody thought it was funny. Everybody thought it was ridiculous,” Goss replied. “There’s no way that you can know that she would not let go of that hammer.”

The three former San Antonio police officers — Eleazar Alejandro, Alfred Flores, an ex-sergeant, and Nathaniel Villalobos — are charged in connection with Perez’s death at her Southwest Side apartment. Prosecutors say the 46-year-old mother of four was in the midst of a mental health crisis when the fatal encounter occurred, and that the officers’ actions were not reasonable.

Defense attorneys argued Tuesday that Perez had already assaulted an officer with a candle and that her “unpredictable and violent” behavior posed a clear threat.

The case has sparked debate over how police in the nation’s seventh-largest city handle mental health calls, while dividing the public over whether the three ex-officers should even have been charged.

It marks the first time in San Antonio’s history that a police officer stands trial for murder for an on-duty shooting. Each faces a potential life sentence if convicted.

Body camera footage from the night of the shooting shows Perez yelling at officers from her first-floor apartment window, demanding a warrant. Officers were initially dispatched after Perez triggered a fire alarm system inside her complex by cutting the wires because she believed the FBI was listening in on her.

The confrontation escalated after Perez threw a glass candle that struck an officer’s arm and later emerged wielding a hammer, according to trial testimony.

Thirteen jurors — seven men and six women, including one alternate — watched more of the body camera footage in a small Bexar County courtroom Tuesday. At least one leaned forward toward their individual video monitor as gunfire erupted on screen.

The three former police officers — Villalobos, Alejandro and Flores — whispered occasionally with each other and their attorneys as they watched themselves on body camera footage projected before the court.

Prosecutors replayed several moments leading up to the shooting, including Perez shouting, “You broke my door down without a warrant!” At one point in the tense confrontation, Perez yelled: “Everybody’s watching you — all of America! You’re harassing me in my apartment!”

In another clip, Villalobos is heard saying, “She’s ready to fight. She came right at me,” as Perez moved toward her apartment window moments before a total of sixteen rounds were fired at her, two of which struck her.

Prosecutors say Alejandro and Flores fired the fatal shots and are charged with murder, while Villalobos faces a lesser charge of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon by a public servant after investigators later determined his rounds did not strike Perez.

Goss, Villalobos’ attorney, later criticized Soto for securing a warrant for the officers’ arrest within 16 hours of the shooting without first determining which officer’s bullets struck Perez.

Jurors also heard testimony describing the chaotic minutes that followed the shooting. As Alejandro was being escorted to a police cruiser after firing his weapon, he was heard telling another officer, “There go my chances at SWAT” — a remark prosecutors say reflected awareness of the gravity of what had just unfolded.

Testimony will continue on Wednesday. The trial is expected to last through mid-November.

Follow @eidelagarza