Opinion ID: 866145
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Jacqueline Fresa

Text: During trial, Trooper Costa testified that on October 2, 2004, he received a phone call from a woman who identified herself as Jacqueline Fresa. He testified that Fresa expressed anger at the arrest of Hernández, and that she complained about receiving threats, because somebody had said that she was the informant that had told the police about Hernández and therefore was responsible for his arrest. Fresa denied being the informant, but admitted she knew Hernández. On the same day, Hipólito told Pinales over the phone that, [t]he mother of my daughters . . . I got told that . . . she screwed me over. But which one of them, who? asked Pinales. The one who was in jail, who came out, replied Hipólito. Hipólito told Pinales that, shortly before Hernández was arrested, the mother of [his] daughters had called Hernández to find out where he was. Hipólito then claimed that, as soon as Hernández told her his location, like five hundred showed up . . . she is a rat[,] man . . . A few days later, on October 7, Hipólito called Pinales again and told him that the mother of his daughters had filed a restraining order against him. During the trial, the district court admitted into evidence certified birth records from the city of Haverhill, -9- Massachusetts, which showed that Díaz-Arias and Fresa were in fact the parents of two daughters. In addition, the district court admitted a certified record from the Haverhill District Court, which reflected that on October 4, 2004, Fresa had filed a restraining order against Díaz-Arias. Thus, the government claims that Fresa was the one Hipólito referred to as the mother of [his] daughters, and that this was conclusive evidence proving that Hipólito was in fact Díaz-Arias.5