Attorneys representing three members of a family charged in connection with the death of a 3-year-old girl during a religious exorcism are asking a Santa Clara County judge to throw out the case under California’s Racial Justice Act, arguing that their prosecution was tainted by bias against their religious faith, ethnicity and national origin.
Background: A Tragic and Controversial Case
The case traces back to Sept. 24, 2021, when Arely Naomi Proctor, a toddler, died at the Iglesia Evangelica Apostoles y Profetas church in San Jose after an extended ritual meant to rid her of supposed demonic possession. Prosecutors allege that the girl was held down for many hours and subjected to violent treatment intended to force out evil spirits.
The victim’s mother, Claudia Elisa Hernandez, 29, her brother, Rene “Aaron” Hernandez, 23, and their father, Pastor Rene Trigueros Hernandez, 63, have been charged with felony child abuse and related counts tied to the death of the child. Prosecutors allege the exorcism ritual involved prolonged restraint and physical force and lasted hours before emergency responders were contacted.
Defense Claims: Racial Justice Act Argument
In court filings ahead of a scheduled hearing, the defense argues that police and prosecutors exhibited “systemic bias or animosity” toward the family’s faith and cultural background, which centers on Pentecostal beliefs in supernatural intervention. They contend that authorities failed to consider that the exorcism might have been a sincere — though tragically misguided — religious act.
Invoking the California Racial Justice Act, the defense claims that the investigation and prosecution were influenced by prejudice against the family’s religion and Salvadoran heritage, not just the criminal conduct itself. Under the 2020 law, defendants can challenge charges if race, ethnicity or national origin played a role in how their case was handled — even without direct evidence of intentional discrimination.
Legal Significance and Public Reaction
The Racial Justice Act was enacted to address racial and ethnic disparities in California’s criminal justice system and has been used in other contexts to challenge alleged bias in policing or prosecution. It allows defendants to seek dismissal, evidentiary hearings, or other remedies if they can show that bias influenced charging decisions, investigative practices, or courtroom procedures.
This case is drawing attention not only because of the deeply disturbing nature of the child’s death but also because it could test the reach of the Racial Justice Act in contexts involving religious belief and cultural practice. Legal experts say the outcome may influence future claims that prosecutions are motivated by bias rather than facts. (Experts point out that, historically, under the Act, defense teams must present statistical or documentary evidence suggesting differential treatment to prevail in such motions.
Next Steps in Court
A hearing on the defense’s motion is expected to take place in the coming days in Santa Clara County Superior Court. Prosecutors have opposed the motion, arguing that the charges are based on compelling evidence of criminal conduct rather than any improper bias.
If the judge grants the motion, it could result in dismissal or delay of the case while further proceedings on bias-related issues are conducted. If denied, the case is likely to proceed toward trial on the existing charges.
