2023-09-03 01:10:25
From more than two meters tall, Marcos Aldazabal – one of the lawyers representing Cristina Fernández de Kirchner in the case for the attack on her – impresses with his physical bearing. Together with José Ubeira, he battles every day in the courts of Comodoro Py asking for the obvious: that the attack on Vice President Cristina Fernández be investigated. Without obstacles or prejudices.
The feeling, one year after the attack, is that everything came to this point. There will be a trial with these only three defendants, they will probably be convicted and that’s it.
That is the end foreseen by many of the people who make up the Federal Judiciary, but not by us. We are going to continue insisting that they investigate and we are going to continue investigating ourselves. It is clear that we are faced with a scenario in which they are not interested in further investigation, but the end of the film is not yet written.
Technically how is the cause today?
It is divided into two parts. An old trick of the Federal Judiciary to not investigate properly. One part, with the three detainees, brought to trial, and everything else, in the investigation stage, with judge María Eugenia Capuchetti and prosecutor Carlos Rívolo.
This last part is the most interesting.
And unfortunately there everything is done uphill. All the evidence that was produced came from the momentum of the lawsuit. We always have to face the barrier that the judge and the prosecutor end up being. This is how it has been since day one.
Do you contemplate the possibility that there is actually nothing behind Fernando Sabag Montiel, Brenda Uliarte and Gabriel Carrizo, that they are the only authors of the assassination attempt?
The indications show something else and since they are not investigated we cannot know what else there was. There are people who know each other and had ties to the defendants and were never thoroughly investigated. In the case about congressman Gerardo Milman, there was a witness who said that he had heard him say “when they kill her, I’ll be on my way to the coast.” It was verified that all the circumstances surrounding that situation were real. The witness is genuine. Milman had presented projects and requests for legislative information in which he talked about the possibility of an attack and about the custody of the vice president and even one that he presented the same day of the attack and then withdrew it. In the house of Brenda Uliarte, a handwritten sheet was found on the Tueller Rule (on shooting in a short space and short distance) that Patricia Bullrich and Milman imported into the country during their time at the Ministry of Security. It is something super technical that many police officers are even unaware of. The deletion of the phones. How can this line of research not be deepened? What happens is that we always face the barrier of slowness, ineffectiveness and ill will.
Inoperability?
I tell a situation. When the Milman thing came up, when the judge saw the videos from the security cameras and told us “Milman is not here.” We started watching the videos and we found it. They said they couldn’t identify Milman. He was at the time the witness had indicated and with the two advisers. When one requests a test and it is rejected, that is not technically appealable; For them to reverse it, it has to be something very serious. The Chamber that reviews what the court does is made up of Leopoldo Bruglia, Pablo Bertuzi and Mariano Llorens. There should be nothing less related to Cristina. Well: four times they gave Capuchetti negative feedback and told them to “investigate seriously”.
-What other lines need to be investigated?
Hernán Carroll, a member of a fascist group Nuevo Centro Derecha, has messages with Brenda Uliarte and meetings before and after the attack. A very suspicious one at the moment when she is about to be arrested. Sabag Montiel from prison asked him to find a lawyer for him. He has ties to Milman and the Federal Revolution. When she testified, they didn’t want to ask for her phone number. I insisted, they asked him for it and when she handed it over he warned that she could have deleted some things. When they opened the cell phone, it had erased everything the day before, it was empty. Someone had warned him. The judge did not investigate further.
It is striking how the phones are deleted in this case.
The content of at least five has already been lost. Milman’s two advisers, Milman himself, Carroll, a person from Revolución Federal who said it was stolen a week before testifying, Sabag Montiel. There are many coincidences.
So the investigation is stalled?
It is not stopped because we insist every week, but everything is done in a way that obstructs the truth. If things come up when you investigate the complaint -we don’t have the institutional structure of the court and the prosecutor’s office- imagine what would be known if the Justice did not put obstacles in our way all the time.
They have just requested action on Ximena de Tezanos Pinto, Cristina Kirchner’s upstairs neighbor.
It had housed members of the Federal Revolution and now it has a member of these fascist groups, Delfina Wagner, who knows Carroll, Uliarte, and Morel. There is a message between her and Brenda Uliarte after the attack; Uliarte’s appearances on Crónica TV coincide with the moment she began working there; she has a direct line with Revolución Federal, there are messages in which Jonathan Morel tells who must be swept away and gives a list of deputies and she responds with a message in which Carrizo talks about the planning of the attack against Cristina; she has ties to Hernán Carroll. But in addition, we are asking for information to be verified.
Which?
As we learned, Cristina’s neighbor had debts, she was an uncollectible defaulter and suddenly, after the attack, without anything having happened to explain it, she was able to pay off all her obligations.
Why do you insist on linking Revolución Federal to the attack?
Brenda Uliarte had attended demonstrations of that group and its leader had said online how she would kill Cristina. Then Sabag Montiel went and did exactly that. In that case, the attitude of the judge and the prosecutor (Marcelo Martínez de Giorgi and Gerardo Pollicita) was better and allowed us to advance further. But the Federal Chamber prevents us from investigating everything together.
Carrizo’s defender, Gastón Marano, maintained that the lawsuit is asking for proof that will be useless (at least with regard to his client) and that the court granted them all the requests they made.
I’m not going to argue with him. But clearly not so. On Carrizo there is a multiplicity of evidence that comes from the defendant himself, which shows him planning the attack and even thinking about killing other people. And regarding the fact that they gave us everything we asked for, we have a statistic on the very low percentage of measures that they granted us. If they had granted us everything today we would be in another scenario.
So the balance one year after the attack is…
The sample of a completely dysfunctional Justice and that is not trained for complex investigations. But on the other hand there is also a specific political intention not to advance along lines that show the links with the power of different people to focus only on the most marginal components of the attack. The message that the Judiciary should give is that we want to take care of democracy. There cannot be a message of impunity, against Cristina or against anyone. The paralysis of Justice gives rise to those involved in these attacks thinking that they can do anything because, totally, nothing happens. «
#Marcos #Aldazabal #Cristinas #lawyer #message #Judiciary #give #care #democracy