Bail request for Raffy's mom denied

Maribel Gomez to remain out on personal recognizance

Maribel Gomez will remain free on her personal recognizance until her trial this September, Grant County Superior Court Judge John Antosz ruled yesterday.

Grant County Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Ed Owens requested Monday that Gomez be held on $500,000 bail after he received two reports from Children and Family Services social workers that Gomez' 17-year-old niece and her 1-year-old were spending time with her, or even living with her, unsupervised.

The conditions of Gomez' release, which took effect May 27, stipulate that she may not spend any time with young children.

Gomez has been charged with first-degree manslaughter in the death of her 2-year-old son, Rafael Gomez, who is also known as Raffy.

The case has attracted state-wide attention because Raffy was placed in foster care four times after social workers noticed signs of abuse and returned each time to Maribel Gomez' care. He died in her care on Sept. 11, 2003.

Maribel Gomez has denied ever abusing her child. She has said he died because he fell from a chair.

Grant County Superior Court Judge John Antosz said the burden of proof lay with the state, and it was not there.

"We only have speculation that the defendants may have been there with a child improperly," Antosz said.

An elated Gomez jumped up when the judge banged the gavel and gave a big hug to her friend Maria Moreno, who testified on her behalf.

The request for bail stemmed from reports from social workers Mario Gonzales and Kate DuVall, who have supervised Gomez' visits with her other four children who are now in foster care.

Gonzales testified that on May 27 and May 29, he arrived at Gomez' home with her children to find her 17-year-old niece (who was referred to only by her last name, Alonso) and Alonso's 1-year-old child.

Gonzales had learned of the Gomez' conditions of release on June 1, he said.

When Gonzales arrived both times, an approved contracted social worker was there already, he said. However, he added that Gomez had apparently lied to him about her niece's age initially, which he attributed to her fear of getting in trouble.

Gonzales said he asked Alonso where she was getting her mail, and she told him she was using Maribel Gomez' address.

DuVall testified that when she visited on May 15, before the restrictions went into place, she noticed that Alonso seemed to be living at the apartment.

"It appeared that she was in her pajamas," DuVall said. "She was disheveled and feeding her infant breakfast, so I assumed she was staying there."

When DuVall visited on both May 27 and May 29, she testified that a contracted social worker was present before she arrived.

Through court interpreter Victor Guzman, Maribel Gomez testified that her niece had moved out of her home on the morning of May 25, which was the day she appeared in court for her arraignment.

On or about June 10, Gomez testified the niece moved to California to live with other family members.

When Owens pushed Gomez on the specific dates cited when the two social workers saw Alonso, Gomez said she was unsure of the dates but steadfast that her niece did not live with her.

"I don't remember the exact dates," she said through her interpreter. "I am very concerned. I have worries in my heart."

In his closing argument, Owens said Gomez had lied to Gonzales about her niece's age, and he felt she was misleading the court.

"The state feels that she did have somebody living there at the time," Owens said. "She's being deceptive to the court and to the state."

But Bobby Moser, Gomez' court-appointed attorney, said the hearing had "clarified" a lot of things. Ultimately, Gomez had given social workers the correct information about her niece, and there was some question as to whether it was the niece who lied to Gonzales, Moser said.

Additionally, the letters from Gonzales and DuVall were not based on their personal knowledge that Alonso lived with Gomez.

"My feeling about this hearing is that it's all been clarified," he said in his closing argument. "I don't think they've got anything to do something as serious as to change the conditions of bail."

After the hearing, Moser said he was not surprised by the judge's ruling.

"It turns out there was not a lot of evidence to support the state's" request, he said.