Judge Boyd instructs Bexar County jury in Saldivar murder trial

In a tense atmosphere at the 187th District Court in Bexar County, Texas, Judge Stephanie Boyd delivered crucial instructions to the jury on April 11, 2025, as they prepared to deliberate the fate of defendant Tamora McIntyre. The courtroom, filled with anticipation, was a stage for the final moments of a trial that had captivated the community.

Judge Boyd emphasized the importance of impartiality, instructing jurors to consider only the evidence presented during the trial. She reminded them that any prior misconduct or offenses by the defendant could not be used against her unless proven beyond a reasonable doubt. This principle of fairness is a cornerstone of the judicial system, ensuring that every defendant is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

As the judge laid out the rules for deliberation, she highlighted the defendant's right to remain silent, stating that McIntyre's choice not to testify should not be held against her. This instruction underscored the legal protections afforded to individuals in the courtroom, reinforcing the idea that the burden of proof lies solely with the prosecution.

The judge also cautioned jurors against external influences, instructing them to avoid any communication about the case outside the jury room and to disregard any personal biases or sympathies. This call for objectivity is vital in maintaining the integrity of the trial process.

As the proceedings moved toward closing arguments, the tension in the room was palpable. The prosecution was set to argue that McIntyre had taken the life of Mark Anthony Saldivar in a Chick-fil-A parking lot, framing the incident as a significant act of violence. The jury's task was clear: to weigh the evidence and determine whether the prosecution had met its burden of proving McIntyre's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

With the judge's instructions echoing in their minds, the jurors prepared to embark on their deliberations, a process that would ultimately decide the outcome of this high-stakes case. The community watched closely, aware that the verdict would resonate far beyond the courtroom, impacting lives and shaping discussions about justice and accountability in their neighborhood.