Video and surgeon testimony show intestinal injuries in assault trial of Mariano Rendon

A video of a barroom altercation and testimony from a trauma surgeon were shown to jurors in Bexar County'''s 187th District Court as the state pressed aggravated-assault charges against Mariano Rendon.

Prosecutor Megan Galloway told jurors the indictment alleges Rendon caused "serious bodily injury" to Pablo Rodriguez Salazar during an early-morning disturbance at El VolcE1n, and described Rendon as the club'''s owner. Galloway said the video admitted as State's Exhibit 2 shows Rendon dropping a knee onto Rodriguez's abdomen; the jury saw a paused portion of that video during testimony.

The case matters because the outcome will turn on whether jurors find the force used was excessive and whether it caused the severe intestinal injuries for which the victim underwent surgery. The prosecution presented both eyewitness and medical evidence to connect the bar confrontation to the injuries Rodriguez later suffered.

In opening statements, Galloway summarized the state's version: Rodriguez and his partner went to El VolcE1n for a birthday celebration; at last call security was collecting open drinks, and after an encounter Rodriguez was forced to the floor. "The force that was exhibited by the defendant in this case was excessive," Galloway told jurors, adding prosecutors would ask the jury to find Rendon guilty of aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury.

Defense attorney Larry Blomquist told jurors they would hear a different version: a lengthy struggle involving security guards, patrons and family members; he said security officer Anthony Cochran had been physically engaged by Rodriguez and others, and that Rendon intervened because Cochran carried a firearm. "Whether that caused the injuries, that is to be determined," Blomquist said, arguing the video clips to be shown capture only the final portion of a larger confrontation.

Officer Mark Soto of the San Antonio Police Department testified he responded to a follow-up call and took statements from Rodriguez and Tina Jimenez; he said he wrote reports and forwarded the case to detectives. Soto also acknowledged he did not take a statement from Rendon or from the on-duty security guard during his initial contact and characterized follow-up interviewing as the detective's responsibility.

Rodriguez testified through an interpreter and described being struck and later experiencing severe stomach pain and vomiting. He identified multiple photographs of injuries and said he was later hospitalized. The state admitted a set of photos (State's Exhibits 4'''9) showing bruises and facial trauma taken before the surgeries.

The prosecution called Dr. Mark Gence, a trauma surgeon, who testified Rodriguez was transferred to North Central Baptist and taken quickly to the operating room after imaging showed free air in the abdomen, a sign of a perforated intestine. Dr. Gence described finding a perforation in the sigmoid colon and a defect in the mesentery and said he removed the damaged segment of bowel. Rodriguez then returned about two weeks later with a high-grade bowel obstruction attributable to adhesions from the earlier operation and required a second surgery; Dr. Gence said Rodriguez spent several days in the hospital and underwent wound care before discharge. Asked whether the injuries constituted serious bodily injury under the legal definition, Dr. Gence answered, "My opinion is that he sustained serious bodily injury based on the injuries."

The court admitted State's Exhibit 2 (the video) without objection and later admitted graphic surgical photos after the defense objected they were prejudicial. The judge applied a balancing test and allowed the images, finding their probative value outweighed the prejudicial effect. The jury also heard a text-message exchange between the defendant and Tina Jimenez that was admitted with redactions to remove hearsay statements by the witness.

Throughout the day the court managed evidentiary issues: lawyers agreed to approach the bench before eliciting extraneous evidence, the court invoked the witness-sequestration rule several times, and the judge ruled on hearsay objections and the admissibility of exhibits. The state's Exhibit 14 (text-message screenshots) was received with redactions; the defense objection to portions attributed to the witness was sustained and those portions were ordered excluded.

Witnesses on both sides described the scene differently, and the defense emphasized gaps in the state's on-scene investigation: defense counsel repeatedly noted there was limited police interviewing of potential witnesses and security staff at the time of the incident. The prosecution relied on later medical records, video evidence and witness statements provided to detectives and to the follow-up unit.

Judge Stephanie Boyd recessed court and directed the jury not to discuss or view trial materials outside the courtroom. Jurors were told to return the next day at 1:30 p.m. for further testimony and cross-examination.

The trial record for the day includes admission of the video (State's Exhibit 2), multiple photographic exhibits (State's Exhibits 3'''9), surgical records (State's Exhibits 10 and 13), and redacted text-message screenshots (State's Exhibit 14). Defense counsel preserved objections to certain exhibits and to portions of witness statements that the court excluded as hearsay.

What remains in the case are disputed issues about how the confrontation began, which participants used what level of force, and whether the force shown in the recorded clip caused the intestinal perforation that led to two surgeries and an extended hospital stay. Jurors will hear additional testimony when the trial resumes.