Atienza was transported to a hospital.
He did not survive.
Norfolk police said he died on June 8, the day after the assault. The medical examiner determined that his death was a homicide caused by blunt-force trauma to the head.
He was 77 years old.
The Investigation
Norfolk police began investigating the incident immediately.
Their initial June 9 statement said detectives determined that Atienza had been involved in an altercation with other people inside the store before the assault. Police subsequently charged White and Mitchell with malicious wounding by mob, aggravated malicious wounding and conspiracy to commit a felony.
The teenage employee was also charged with assault and battery, aggravated malicious wounding and conspiracy to commit a felony.
At that stage, the investigation was still developing.
The case later became more serious.
According to court records reviewed by the New York Post, the charges against White and Mitchell were subsequently increased to second-degree murder. Both adults are being held without bond in Norfolk.
The teenager is being held at the Norfolk Juvenile Detention Center.
Because she is under 18, her identity has not been publicly released.
The legal proceedings will determine the precise criminal responsibility of each defendant.
That distinction is important.
The existence of charges does not establish guilt.
The prosecution must still prove its allegations in court.
What the Defense Says
The attorney representing Travis White has challenged the suggestion that the adults went to Walmart intending to kill Atienza.
Attorney James Broccoletti told WTKR that the parents responded after their daughter called them and that they were emotionally reacting to her distress.
He characterized the encounter as spontaneous rather than planned.
According to the defense, the adults went to the store because they were concerned about their daughter and the confrontation escalated unexpectedly.
The defense has also disputed whether the evidence supports a murder charge, arguing that the physical conduct alleged in the case does not necessarily demonstrate that the defendants intended or could reasonably have anticipated that Atienza would die.
Those are arguments for the legal process to resolve.
The prosecution's case, meanwhile, will depend on evidence including surveillance footage, medical findings, witness accounts and other investigative material.
The court—not media coverage—will ultimately determine what criminal liability, if any, has been established.
A Minor Dispute With Major Consequences
The circumstances of the case have attracted attention partly because of the apparent disconnect between the beginning of the confrontation and its outcome.
A shopping cart was allegedly at the center of the original disagreement.
There was an argument.
According to Josephine, the teenager allegedly threw a can.
The teenager then contacted her parents.
The parents came to the store.
A physical confrontation followed.
A 77-year-old man suffered a fatal head injury.
The sequence demonstrates how quickly ordinary disagreements can become dangerous when emotions escalate.
It is impossible to know from the available public information precisely what each person was thinking during every moment of the confrontation.
But the result is clear.
A family went to a store to buy groceries.
One member of that family did not return home.
The Human Cost
For Josephine Atienza, the legal proceedings are only one part of what happened.
She lost her husband of 42 years.
Their son lost his father.
In her interview with WTKR, Josephine described the loneliness she now experiences and the pain of realizing that her husband will not be coming home.
Her grief is not a legal argument.
It is the personal consequence of the incident.
Crime stories are often reduced to charges, court dates and police statements.
But behind every homicide case is a family dealing with an absence that cannot be reversed.
For the Atienza family, that absence is Bert.