Judge in Ayon murder case won’t allow defense to accuse uncharged potential suspect

According to the defense attorney for accused killer Jesus Contreras Perez, there is a reasonable possibility that a co-worker of the victim in the case may have committed the crime. Furthermore, says attorney Claire Longdin, police did not properly investigate him as a suspect while looking into the disappearance/ murder of 27-year-old Cassandra Ayon of Loyal.

The jury in the first-degree murder trial for Contreras Perez that is to begin on June 6 will not hear Longdin’s theory, however, Judge Daniel Diehn ruled last week. The suspect named by Longdin did have the motive, Diehn said, but did not have any apparent opportunity to kill her on the night she went missing in October 2020 nor does any physical evidence exist to suggest he did.

Ayon has not been seen since Oct. 3, 2020, and her disappearance is being investigated as a murder. Her ex-boyfriend with whom she has a child, the 41-year old Contreras Perez of Mosinee, has been linked to her disappearance/murder by witnesses who said he had been stalking Ayon and was apparently following her on the night she went missing. He has been charged with first-degree intentional homicide/as party to a crime, hiding a corpse/as party to a crime, and stalking/ domestic abuse. A 5-day jury trial in the case is scheduled to begin in Clark County Circuit Court in Neillsville on June 6.

In the run-up to the trial, Longdin filed a motion to allow her to tell the jury about a man who worked with Ayon at Marathon Cheese, and who allegedly was “seething mad” at her because she refused to go out with him and at one point accused him of molesting children. Because police named Contreras Perez as their main suspect early in their investigation of Ayon’s disappearance, the co-worker was never considered, Longdin said at a May 24 motion hearing.

“The investigation was always focused on my client,” Longdin said. “It’s important to note that not all stones were turned over, that not all leads were followed. There was razor focus on him (Contreras Perez) from the start.

“I do think there’s an individual that worked with Ms. Ayon who more than one person told law enforcement was obsessed with her, was angry at her, that she had fears of.”

At the motion hearing, Longdin played a social media video made by the co-worker, on Oct. 12, 2021, about a year after Ayon’s disappearance and alleged murder.

Longdin said the video shows the co-worker was “seething mad at Ms. Ayon a year after she disappeared.” The video shows the man disparaging Marathon Cheese and employees there, and makes several references to Ayon as “probably not around anymore.”

Longdin said the co-worker “was never looked at” as a suspect.

“I just don’t see how that’s something law enforcement would not follow up on,” Longdin said. “There’s just as much of a probability that this individual could have been involved in it.”

Longdin said it would be “a complete miscarriage of justice” if the co-worker is not investigated.

“That needs to be followed up on or at least be known to the jury,” she said.

Former Clark County Sheriff’s Department detective Scott Klueckman testified at last week’s hearing that the co-worker was known. Other employees at Marathon Cheese told investigators that the man had “some issues” with Ayon, Klueckman said. He retired during the course of the investigation, but said he told his superiors about the need to look into the co-worker as a suspect. That lead “most certainly” needed to be explored, Klueckman said.

Longdin said she believes she should be allowed to tell a jury about the other man as he should be considered a suspect.

“We have a subject who’s clearly still raging mad at this woman,” she said. “He’s still clearly upset with the missing woman.”

Much of the case against Contreras Perez, Longdin said, is based on witness statements regarding his alleged stalking and following her on the night of the murder, yet law enforcement allegedly did not follow up on statements made about the co-worker.

“This individual also made threats,” Longdin said. “If anything this needs to get in (to the trial) to show the investigation was only targeted at my client. The investigation was not complete.”

State Assistant Attorney General Annie Jay said Longdin can raise issues about the investigation during the trial, but cannot throw out a name of an uncharged suspect.

“Attacking the investigation is always allowable,” Jay said, but the defense cannot be allowed to accuse someone of killing someone without meeting the standards of proof.

“Introducing evidence that an innocent person killed someone is not appropriate,” Jay said.

Jay is prosecuting the case along with Clark County District Attorney Melissa Inlow.

Diehn issued a written ruling on the motion a day after the hearing. In it, he said Longdin had to meet three criteria to be able to introduce the theory of the murder, but only met one of them.

As to motive, Diehn said that standard was met. From statements made by other Marathon Cheese employees and the video presented in court, it’s clear, Diehn said, that the co-worker had reason to be upset with Ayon.

“Believing (a) victim had rejected him and damaged his reputation is a plausible reason to commit the charged offenses,” Diehn wrote.

Longdin did not prove the subject had the opportunity, Dien continues. Longdin said opportunity was present because the man worked with Ayon and knew her schedule, and possessed guns.

However, Diehn wrote, “No information was presented to suggest that (the co-worker) had any information about the victim’s movements outside of work, or that he had any actual ability to commit the offenses charged.”

Also, Diehn wrote, Longdin produced no actual evidence that the co-worker participated in the crimes.

“Simply, there is absolutely nothing that provided any real factual connection between (the co-worker) and the disappearance of the victim,” Diehn wrote.