Injustice in the Querencia Los Cabos Case: What Baja California Sur Prosecutors Did After a 5-Year-Old Girl Was Hurt

What Baja California Sur prosecutors did after a 5-year-old girl was thrown from a golf cart at Querencia Los Cabos, and why it is an injustice.

Vox Populi Staff

A dry arroyo bed with palo verde trees in afternoon light near San José del Cabo

On March 25, 2025, a truck bearing Querencia markings rear-ended a golf cart on Boulevard Querencia; a 5-year-old girl was thrown out. According to a decision dated February 11, 2026, and its authorization, Baja California Sur prosecutors decided not to prosecute three offenses, including failure to render aid, and to pursue the driver, under investigation, for unintentional bodily injury and property damage. According to the transcription of the ruling, a pretrial judge revoked it on September 23, 2026, as not properly grounded or reasoned. The same ruling considered not prosecuting the companies warranted. Prosecutors' failure to ground and reason the decision was the injustice in the Querencia Los Cabos case.

What happened on March 25, 2025

The truck, a RAM 700 bearing Querencia markings, struck the golf cart from behind at about 10:15 a.m. on Boulevard Querencia. The cart carried an adult and three children, and the girl was thrown out of it.

The driver, who is under investigation, told a state investigator on March 26, 2025: "I got distracted for a few seconds looking down and could no longer avoid it" (translated from Spanish; in the original, "me distraje unos segundos volteando hacia abajo y ya no pude evadirlo").

According to the medical records, the girl's diagnosis included head trauma, along with pediatric polytrauma, blunt chest trauma, a pulmonary contusion and laceration, a traumatic pneumatocele (an air pocket in the lung caused by injury) and a 10% laminar pneumothorax, and her prognosis was guarded. Those records also show that a CT scan ruled out brain or spinal injury.

The on-duty physician at Hospital H+ Los Cabos told a state investigator on March 25, 2025, that the injuries "may put her life at risk" (translated from Spanish: "pueden poner en riesgo la vida"). The crash and the hospital records are set out in detail in a report on what happened on March 25, 2025.

How the authorities learned

No notice reached the police from the place where the crash happened. According to the police report dated March 27, 2025, by the time the crash was reported through C2, a control and monitoring center, municipal traffic police had no report of it.

According to the records, it was the hospital rather than Querencia's staff that alerted the authorities to the crash. Each notice in that chain is laid out in a separate account of how word of the crash reached the authorities.

What prosecutors decided

State prosecutors (Ministerio Público), the authority that investigates crimes and decides whether to take a case to a judge, work within the Baja California Sur State Attorney General's Office (Procuraduría). In this case they opened an investigation file (carpeta de investigación) for four offenses: unintentional bodily injury (lesiones culposas), failure to render aid (omisión de auxilio), property damage (daños) and failure to file a medical report (omisión de informe médico).

Court records show that on July 15, 2026, prosecutors asked a pretrial judge (Juez de Control), who oversees the investigation stage, for an initial hearing, the step at which charges may be formally brought; it is not a trial. The request concerned the driver, the club's doctor, both under investigation, and Querencia Construcciones, S. de R.L. de C.V. (the suffix marks a Mexican limited-liability company, roughly comparable to a U.S. LLC).

Prosecutors can also decline to take specific offenses to a judge through a decision not to prosecute (no ejercicio de la acción penal). According to the decision and its authorization, the prosecutor decided not to prosecute the driver and the club's doctor, both under investigation, Querencia Real Estate, S. de R.L. de C.V. and Querencia Golf Club, S. de R.L. de C.V. for failure to render aid, failure to file a medical report and concealment (encubrimiento), on the ground that the conduct did not fit the legal definition of those offenses (atipicidad), and to pursue prosecution of the driver for unintentional bodily injury and property damage. Who drew it up and who approved it is covered in a closer look at the prosecutors' decision not to prosecute.

Such a decision can be reviewed at an audiencia de control, a hearing before a pretrial judge to review a decision not to prosecute. According to the transcription of the ruling, on September 23, 2026, a pretrial judge (Juez de Control) in Los Cabos revoked a prosecutor's decision not to prosecute specific offenses, dated February 11, 2026, and authorized on February 13, because it was not properly grounded or reasoned, and ordered the investigation to continue; prosecutors may issue a new, properly grounded and reasoned decision. In the same ruling, the judge considered that not prosecuting was warranted as to the companies (personas morales).

Why it is an injustice

Article 16 of Mexico's Constitution requires every act of authority to be grounded in law and reasoned, and a decision that declined to prosecute failure to render aid after a 5-year-old was thrown from a golf cart, without meeting that requirement, was an injustice in the Querencia Los Cabos case, and it was not due process. That judgment is about what the authorities did: the driver and the club's doctor, both under investigation, and the companies named in these records are presumed innocent, and the judge's revocation is not a finding against any of them.

More in this series