When the news first broke about the probate/inheritance lawsuit against Nikki Araguz that was filed by her late husband's ex wife Heather Delgado, there were reports that Nikki Araguz had been married to another man before before she married Thomas Araguz. However, nearly every one of the newspaper reports that included mention of the 1999 marriage between Nikki Araguz and Emilio Mata, who she divorced in 2007, has removed mention of Mr. Mata's name from them. It seems like the major news media wants to avoid discussing the existence of this previous marriage, and are possibly unwilling to ask Mr. Mata questions about his relationship with Nikki out of fear of creating what they may believe would be embarrassment for a secondary figure in the matter. There is of course the possibility that Mr. Mata has contacted various media outlets and asked them to remove him from their written reports, and to refrain from getting him involved. Even if that were true, its amazing that a media outlet would honor a request from that individual, at the same time they have made every effort imaginable to hunt down every private detail of Nikki Araguz's life that they have been able to discover, and to report about all of it in detail.
One has to wonder though, whether or not one of the parties to the probate lawsuit against Nikki Araguz, might be interested in making Emilio Mata a witness in their case. At a minimum it seems like Mr. Mata would be aware of the physical morphology of Nikki's genitalia during the period of time between 1999 and 2007. Parenthetically, the news media doesn't appear to have uncovered many details about the nature of the all important October 2008 surgery that Nikki Araguz received. Information published by people representing Nikki has reported that Nikki Araguz received genital reconstruction surgery from Marci Bowers, MD in Trinidad, Colorado on October 7, 2008, a couple months after her marriage to Thomas Araguz. However, based on the Littleton v. Prange decision, the state of Nikki's genitals may be considered irrelevant by the court, since the court in the Littleton case made its absurd judgement purely on the presumed, but never medically verified, chromosomal status of Christie Littleton. Surely the discovery process is likely to reveal whether or not one of the parties is interested in Emilio Mata, in deposing him and/or calling him as a witness if the case ever gets to a trial. If one of the parties subpoenas him to give deposition testimony, it will surely be interesting to find out what questions they ask him.