The Prosecutor’s Office detailed the crimes for which Manuel Monsalve is being prosecuted, while his defense hopes that he will remain under house arrest “like Cathy Barriga.”
A month after the complaint was filed against him, the former Undersecretary of the Interior, Manuel Monsalvearrived at the Justice Center to face this Friday the formalization by the crimes of rape and sexual abuse.
At around 9:15 a.m. the hearing began in room 103 of building C, where the former government authority entered handcuffed. Given this, the defense lawyer María Inés Horvitz requested that the handcuffs be removed, since in his opinion, There was no danger of escape, which was accepted by Judge Mario Cayul.
After that, Manuel Monsalve’s defense accused and requested the illegality of detentionbecause “it is the deprivation of liberty of a person without any justification of urgency.” However, The magistrate rejected this request.
Defense attorneys later requested absolute reserve of the hearing, considering that the formalization was being transmitted through the website of the Judiciary. For her part, the complaining lawyer, María Elena Santibáñez, requested only that the name of the complainant be protected and the audiovisual records that are evidence in the case be censored.
The reservation of the formalization and the crimes attributed to Manuel Monsalve
Under this context, the judge decided that the hearing could be broadcast until the Prosecutor’s Office presented the background information, so after the above, The instance would become reserved, without the
In this sense, the prosecutor Xavier Armendariz He began his presentation of the background, whose presentation lasted just over four minutes. Here the persecutor gave an account of the facts that are attributed to Manuel Monsalve: consummated rape of a person over 14 years of age and a second crime classified as sexual abuse consummated degree of development.
The questions from Manuel Monsalve’s defense regarding the reservation of the case and the request to postpone formalization
In the middle of the hearing, the defense lawyer, Cristián Arias, questioned the confidentiality of the case, since due to this he accused that they have not had access to documents in the investigative foldersuch as, for example, at security cameras, messaging of the alleged victim and content of the complaints.
Considering the above, the defense requested to schedule another hearing in order to have more time to analyze all the background of the case.
“Everything was beaten and said about our client.. We decided not to speak precisely because we wanted to reach this instance that gives us guarantee that we are going here to really know the evidence of the charge and what the Public Ministry really has against our client. And that, finallyis totally detrimental to the guarantee of an accused who has the right to prepare his defense adequately.. How are we going to face a discussion about precautionary measures without really, at the very least, having a couple of days?” said lawyer María Inés Horvitz.
Under this context, the magistrate allowed a recess to discuss the background, but refused to postpone the formalization.
Lawyer assured that Manuel Monsalve has collaborated and hopes that house arrest will be ordered
After a recess in the formalization hearing, the lawyer María Inés Horvitz He assured that Manuel Monsalve has collaborated in everything that the Public Ministry has requested. For this reason, the jurist maintained that she hopes that the former undersecretary will be left with the precautionary measure of house arrest. “Obvious, like Cathy Barriga, we would very much like“, he explained.
Along these lines, Horvitz declared: “We we want him to have personal securitybecause as a former undersecretary and as a person of high public knowledge, we fear for your safety“.
On the other hand, at the hearing the lawyer questioned whether Monsalve has power, one day after the statements of the complainant’s father in an interview with Chilevisión, who stated that the former undersecretary of the Interior “He is not just any person, he is a powerful man who was in charge of the police”for which he expressed “fear” that he could “intervene in the investigation“.
In this sense, he criticized that the former government authority ““He had Interpol alerts or these early alerts because they were afraid he would escape.”
To which he added: “He was in his apartment in Viña del Mar all the time, besieged by journalists practically every day. He came to Santiago only to meet with his lawyers. There was, there is no reason in a person who has no criminal record, who is known, who with practically everything that has happened, is said to have power. What power does former Undersecretary Monsalve have? Now he is an ordinary citizen“, hill.
What are the potential implications of high-profile legal cases on public perception and the judicial process?
Interview: The Future of Justice and Accountability – Time.news Editor with Legal Expert
Time.news Editor (TNE): Good day, and thank you for joining us. Today we have the opportunity to discuss a significant and sensitive case involving former Undersecretary of the Interior, Manuel Monsalve, who is facing serious charges of rape and sexual abuse. With us is legal expert, Dr. Laura Mendez, who has extensive experience in criminal law and human rights. Welcome, Dr. Mendez.
Dr. Laura Mendez (LM): Thank you for having me. It’s a pleasure to be here to discuss such an important issue.
TNE: The proceedings against Manuel Monsalve have sparked considerable public interest. Could you provide us with a brief overview of the charges he is facing and the current status of the case?
LM: Certainly. Manuel Monsalve is being prosecuted for two significant charges: rape of an individual over the age of 14 and sexual abuse. The formalization hearing began recently, during which the prosecution presented its case, outlining the allegations against him. The situation has escalated, particularly given Monsalve’s former political position.
TNE: The defense has already made several attempts to challenge the proceedings, including a request to remove his handcuffs and accusations regarding the illegality of his detention. What do you make of these actions?
LM: It’s not unusual for a defense team to contest detention conditions, especially for high-profile individuals. They often argue that their client poses no flight risk and should not be treated like a common criminal. However, the court has to weigh these claims against the severity of the allegations. In this case, the judge opted to keep some form of restraint, which suggests that they are taking the charges seriously.
TNE: After the initial public presentation of the charges, the hearing moved to a reserved session. Why is confidentiality so critical in cases like this?
LM: Confidentiality is crucial in such sensitive cases to protect the privacy of the complainants and the integrity of the judicial process. It prevents prejudicial information from influencing the public or potential jurors before all the facts are established. However, it can create challenges for the defense, as they may feel they don’t have adequate access to the evidence against their client. This tension is common in high-profile cases.
TNE: Exactly. Monsalve’s attorneys have expressed concerns about their ability to prepare a robust defense without full access to the evidence. How often do you see this balance between the rights of the accused and the need for an effective and fair judicial process?
LM: This is a very delicate balance in any legal system. The accused has a right to a fair trial and the opportunity to defend themselves adequately, which includes access to evidence. However, this must be balanced against the protection of victims’ rights and the integrity of the legal process. Judges often wear multiple hats in these scenarios, as they need to protect both sides. Ultimately, it requires careful consideration to ensure fairness for all involved.
TNE: In cases like this, where allegations are so serious, what role does public opinion play, and how might it affect the proceedings?
LM: Public opinion can be a double-edged sword. On one hand, it brings attention to the issues at play, potentially leading to greater accountability for powerful figures. On the other hand, it can create a media frenzy that affects the jurors’ perceptions and influences the legal process. Courts strive to insulate themselves from public sentiment, but the reality is that it can seep into judicial proceedings, making impartiality difficult.
TNE: Monsalve’s defense attorney hopes for house arrest as a precautionary measure, drawing a parallel to another case involving Cathy Barriga. How important is the consistency in applying precautionary measures, and what implications could such decisions have?
LM: Consistency in judicial decisions regarding precautionary measures is essential for maintaining public trust in the legal system. If one individual receives leniency due to their status while another does not, it can lead to perceptions of favoritism or inequality under the law. These decisions can set precedents that may influence future cases, so it’s important that the court carefully weighs all factors—such as the nature of the allegations, the individual’s cooperation with authorities, and their flight risk.
TNE: Dr. Mendez, thank you so much for your insights today. As we continue to follow this case, it’s clear there’s a complex interplay of legal rights, public perception, and the pursuit of justice. We appreciate your expertise in guiding us through these important issues.
LM: Thank you for having me. It’s an important discussion, and I hope for a resolution that upholds justice for all parties involved.
TNE: Absolutely. Stay tuned for more updates on this case and other important stories as they develop. Thank you for your time.