Las Vegas Sun

December 22, 2014

Currently: 45° — Complete forecast | Log in | Create an account

Police: Man paid undercover cop $2,000 to kill wife as birthday gift

Metro Police arrested a man accused of plotting to kill his wife and paying an undercover officer $2,000 to do the job as his 32nd birthday gift.

Jorge Victorino-Vazquez, 32, of Las Vegas was arrested last weekend on charges of solicitation to commit murder, burglary and conspiracy to commit murder, according to the arrest report.

Victorino-Vazquez allegedly asked another person on April 15 if that person knew of anyone willing to kill his wife or sell him a gun, according to the arrest report.

The confidential informant, whose identity has been kept anonymous for safety reasons, called police three days later after feeling guilty about what Victorino-Vazquez had allegedly said, the report said.

Police asked the informant to set up a meeting with Victorino-Vazquez and an undercover officer on Thursday, the report said.

Victorino-Vazquez agreed to meet at Triple Play on Decatur and Oakey boulevards, police said.

Once at the bar, Victorino-Vazquez told the undercover officer in Spanish that he didn’t care how much it would cost, the report said.

Victorino-Vazquez “wanted his wife killed because she was cheating on him, took his money, took his vehicles, wouldn’t sign papers for him, and always threatened to call INS to have him deported,” the arrest report said.

According to the report, Victorino-Vazquez wanted the undercover officer to break into his home around midnight on Sunday and early Monday, “beat him up, steal his stuff and kill his wife.”

The undercover officer asked for $2,000 and gave Victorino-Vazquez several opportunities to change his mind, the report said.

Victorino-Vazquez allegedly agreed to the price and to meet with the undercover officer again, the report said.

During the second meeting on Friday outside a furniture store on Sahara Avenue and Decatur Boulevard, Victorino-Vazquez gave the undercover officer $1,000 upfront, a photo of his wife and a diagram of his house and neighborhood, the report said.

The undercover officer and Victorino-Vazquez met once more on Saturday to pay another $1,000, give the officer his wife’s name and the address to his house, the report said.

Victorino-Vazquez was taken into custody around 8 p.m. Saturday, the report said.

According to the report, Victorino-Vazquez was taken to an interviewing room inside police headquarters.

His right hand was handcuffed to the table and when a detective stepped out of the room, Victorino-Vazquez was seen through the interview door holding a belt around his neck, the report said.

Several detectives went to take the belt away from Victorino-Vazquez, who denied plotting to kill his wife but acknowledged that he paid the undercover officer $2,000 to break into his home and rob him, the report said.

Victorino-Vazquez was booked at the Clark County Detention Center and is scheduled to appear in court on Wednesday.

Join the Discussion:

Check this out for a full explanation of our conversion to the LiveFyre commenting system and instructions on how to sign up for an account.

Full comments policy

Previous Discussion: 18 comments so far…

Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.

Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.

  1. A heart-felt "thanks!" to that confidential informant. He saved a life.

  2. I have an X. I can relate.

    "You don't know anything about a woman until you meet her in court." -- Norman Mailer

  3. What an idiot. He deserves whatever the courts do to him.

  4. There's a lifetime movie on the same scenario. True story. Ex-con hired to commit murder and turned the conspirator into the police.

  5. "First, you are an illegal alien. So, you have no actual rights in this country to property or assets."

    BChap -- wrong. Check the Constitutions you once swore an oath to support, protect and defend. Nevada's Article 1, Section 8 -- "5. No PERSON shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law." Notice the absence of any citizenship pre-qualification.

    "Hell hath no fury like the wrath of a woman scorned" -- popular misquote from a William Congreve play

  6. Oddly enough, I agree with KillerB regarding BChap's erroneous statement.

    I'm just wondering how a person, who is completely undocumented, can purchase land, a house, or a vehicle in the USA (I really protested when I recently had to give out my SSN to purchase a new truck with a certified check, i.e. cash - yup, there is a law that says I have to do so, although I can't recall the specific law).

    Maybe Mr. KillerB (or others) could enlighten me, because I don't have a clue on this.

  7. "I'm just wondering how a person, who is completely undocumented, can purchase land, a house, or a vehicle in the USA..."

    Test_Guy -- whether "documented" or not is irrelevant. One's right to life, liberty and property are human rights each of us are born with, along with the right to make and enforce contracts, none of it requiring government validation. Probably first officially recognized by the Magna Carta and embodied in the Declaration of Independence. And certainly enshrined in Nevada's Declaration of Rights.

    "...the key to this case is that Victorino-Vazquez, as an illegal alien, opted not to claim any assets or property in his relationship."

    BChap -- there you go again, making it up as you go along. The article quoted him only that she had taken everything, not one word about anything being in her name. Seems obvious the article said hiring the hitman was his way of opting to make that claim.

    "If the exercise of constitutional rights will thwart the effectiveness of a system of law enforcement, then there is something very wrong with that system." -- Escobedo v. State of Illinois, 378 U.S. 478, 490 (1964)

  8. Not to get too far off topic .. But Mr K, how does the Nevada Constitution and US Decl.of.Indp. give foreign nationals the same rights as Nevada and US citizens?

    I'm really not trying to be cute here (so please don't flame me sir)... But I was under the impression that the Constitution was "We the People, in order to form a more perfect union.... etc...etc... do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America" ... not "for the benifit of China, Mexico, Canada..et.al.

    I don't recall that the Magna Carta or the Decl.of.Ind. , saying that it was established for other nationals (unless one wants to go to the extream and say that the founders 'were other nationals' at the time the documents were written, but let's not hash that)...

    And, to clarify, in my original post, I was looking for a specific law that exists at this moment, not an opinion that the US/NV government has no right to make and enforce regulations for contracts - which they seem to have and do often enforce (although you and I both may believe that they ought not to be doing so).

    Thanks.

  9. "But Mr K, how does the Nevada Constitution and US Decl.of.Indp. give foreign nationals the same rights as Nevada and US citizens?"

    Test_Guy -- the short answer is they don't give anybody rights, they secure the freedoms already in existence. They give rights to the governments they constitute as a source code for what those governments can and cannot do. Laws or rules passed conflicting with anything in the Constitutions are technically a nullity.

    A good answer to your questions is Nevada's Article 1 "Declaration of Rights," Section 1. Read it for yourself @ http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Const/NVConst... -- especially the first words "ALL MEN are by Nature free and equal ..." Those words mean just what they seem to mean.

    And I really don't flame, do I? If someone is stupid I may point it out. Some others may choose to make it personal, I really don't care.

    Class dismissed.

    "The foundation of the freedoms we enjoy as Americans is the U.S. Constitution, the longest surviving constitution of any nation in history. To be civically unaware is to diminish our freedom, but knowing our history makes us all better Americans." -- George Nethercutt Jr., former Congressman in his book "In Tune with America"

  10. Pardon me for interrupting this great conversation regarding governmnet procedure but it seems to me that the real problem here is...government procedure. Just eliminate the government, string the guy up the the nearest/tallest tree and be done with it. Think of how much money this would save the taxpayers. No worries about citizenship or such mundane things as that....

  11. @BChap - no one said (but you) KillerB "got me" - please don't confuse discussion with agreement here... in fact, the main question I posed was not answered.

    @KillerB said - "Laws or rules passed conflicting with anything in the Constitutions are technically a nullity"

    "Technicality" and "conflicting" are highly open to interpretation, and historically are a great source of conflict over how the Constitution is interpreted.

    Funny thing - See the comics section for today (April 25, 2012) ... take a look at "Non Sequitur" by Wiley Miller.

  12. @crazy-person - We'll remember your request when/if you, your spouse, your child, your family members, your close friends, et.al. are ever accused of a felony crime. We'll just "string-em-up" and save us a wad of cash.

    Having been on the victim end of an attempted murder, I waited six long years for the perp to come to trial. I didn't like it, not one whit. And I am actively working with people in the legislative branch to remove some "so-called "rights" that the perp used as delay tactics. I think this might result in some improvement. It's not as satisfying, but it's way better than wild-west justice.

  13. "Just eliminate the government, string the guy up the the nearest/tallest tree and be done with it. Think of how much money this would save the taxpayers."

    crazy_p -- right, let's go back to mob rule and roving lynch mobs dispensing your brand of justice. Test_Guy answered you best.

    "Technicality" and "conflicting" are highly open to interpretation, and historically are a great source of conflict over how the Constitution is interpreted."

    Test_Guy -- and that's what keeps the courts in business. Funny how even the most basic points of law are still actively debated in that forum 200+ years later. As for your "the main question I posed was not answered," it was, seems not to your satisfaction. Maybe there is no answer. So do what I did and study. Start with the Constitutions and work from there. Andrew Napolitano has written some good books. Start with "The Constitution in Exile."

    As for your unfortunate experience, without knowing the details I'd have to say welcome to our utterly corrupted "just us" system. I can tell you that firsthand. Like the rest of government now, the courts exist mainly to justify legal plunder.

    "The legal system has also been wounded by lawyers who themselves no longer respect the rule of law ..... When lawyers cannot be trusted to observe the fair processes essential to maintaining the rule of law, how can we expect the public to respect the process?" -- the Honorable Edith Jones to Harvard's Federalist Club "American Legal System Is Corrupt Beyond Recognition, Judge Tells Harvard Law School" 2/28/03

  14. @BChap - Ah, name calling, the only refuge of those who have no valid arguments.

  15. "...Ah, name calling, the only refuge of those who have no valid arguments."

    Test_Guy -- welcome to the herd.

    "Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people." -- Admiral Hyman G. Rickover

  16. @bChap - um.. you are in error thinking nationals of other countries cannot own property and/or can hold property or own individual/joint banking accounts in the US ... they can.

    Just as I can own a house in China with my spouse (she's Chinese, not me... I'm from South Carolina).. she can hold property here - and befor you assume anything, she's not an illegal, she's quite the American Citizen now, but held property here before she was. Her parents (who are not US Citizens) own property and bank accounts here.

    I did not agree or disagree with KillerB ... I was only discussing, asking for why he thought his position was valid... this is how one enriches one's mind and learns critical thinking skills; one considers all opinions. Is this the statement I made, which you seem to have read incorrectly ?

    "(although you and I both may believe that they (the government) ought not to be doing so)."

    This does not convey agreement .... note the use of the word "may" ... I'm just being polite in my discussions with KillerB. No need to be rude here. And, just to clarify, there are plenty of times I think the government should butt-out of things... but other times I think they need to have an iron fist. Sometimes I may agree with Mr.K, sometimes with you ... when I want people to know exactly what I think, I state it in very unambiguous terms.

    You also wrote - "Outside of that, and in his relationship with his partner here in the United States, as an illegal alien, he has no rights to the property and assets accumulated from that relationship."

    Would you care to state the law that says this so I can read it? I really, very respectfully, think you are mistaken here... I believe that state law, not federal law, governs spousal and/or common-law-spousal property rights. Some states are common-property states, some not... but things generally acquired after a marriage (to an undocumented person or not), are divisible according to state laws (in China, there are similar laws to deal with the fact that I married a Chinese National and that I am not citizen there, but the laws are similar). If you think otherwise, I'd appreciate seeing any Nevada or Federal law that supports your position, really, I would. ( BTW - I've already asked my best friend, who is a top-notch attorney, and accordingly, the answer I gave is consistent with exisating state laws).

    I'm actually suprised at your responses to me .. normally you are much more civil.

    If you would sir, in the future, please don't think or imply that I'm a sheeple, blindly following whatever flag is being flown. And please don't stoop to calling me names or slapping a 'one-size-fits-all-who-you-perceive-disagrees-with-you' label on me. I'm not anything like the person you make me out to be here and I can think for myself very well, thank you very much.

  17. @BChap - And, to clarify, in my original post, I took exception with your reading of the law as it pertains to spousal / common-law-spousal property.

    After that I was looking for a specific law that exists at this moment, that says "how a person, who is completely undocumented, can purchase land, a house, or a vehicle in the USA...".... This is an entirely different question of law.

    Later on, these postings went off topic with Mr.K, and I wanted to know his thought process and why he thought what he thought.

    For the original question, my gut tells me the answer is that's it's not possible for an undocumented person to own land, houses, et. al. unless one provides false identification papers (SSN, Alien Number, et. al).

    For the latter off-topic discussion with Mr.K, I was happy to have been able to have a civil exchange of words and was glad to see him respond. It was not a point or me agreeing with him or not.. and really, why do I need to state if I agree or not?... my point was to discuss, not beat anyone over the head with ideology.

  18. @BChap - what do you really mean to say here? ;-) (wink wink) - Appreciate your viewpoints. I don't think too much of criminal activity either. Have a good one.