š A casi 6 meses de la sustracciĆ³n del menor Loan Danilo PeƱa en un paraje de 9 de Julio en Corrientes. Habla Ernesto "Tito" GonzĆ”lez, abogado del exmarino Carlos PĆ©rez y su mujer, Victoria Caillava.
"En la frontera pasan cualquier cosa"
"PĆ©rez y RodrĆguez no tienen relaciĆ³n"
"Pedimos exclusiĆ³n probatoria del celular"
"Pozzer fue dubitativa con los procesamientos"
š SeguĆ en #Alerta24/7
"En la frontera pasan cualquier cosa"
"PĆ©rez y RodrĆguez no tienen relaciĆ³n"
"Pedimos exclusiĆ³n probatoria del celular"
"Pozzer fue dubitativa con los procesamientos"
š SeguĆ en #Alerta24/7
Category
š
NewsTranscript
00:00We have a question from Carlos Perez and Maria Victoria Cayllaba.
00:06What about the theory of the accident?
00:08We were struck by the fact that the judge does not rule out the theory of the accident.
00:14Although I have listened to you, you said it in this program,
00:18the accident did not occur in any way.
00:20You were taxable with that.
00:22When the penalty for an accident, which would be a guilty homicide,
00:29is less than that of a subtraction of a minor of 10 years.
00:34Perhaps you have changed your point of view from the trial.
00:37Do you still think the same?
00:41No, not at all. I still believe in my position.
00:46In fact, it is doubtful to the judge at the time of processing all of you
00:51because it speaks of a subtraction of an organized plan
00:55between seven people who did not know each other, who had no relationship,
00:59and that this plan was executed through an accident.
01:02When you read it, you can summarize it in those few words,
01:06but this alcohol plasmas it.
01:08It talks about an organization, a planning,
01:10between the people, Ramirez, Miltiati, Benitez, Lina PeƱa, Perez, Cayllaba,
01:15even the commissioner, who appears only,
01:18who has no kind of bond with each other,
01:21one wants to put more pieces together,
01:24and he can't put together a single piece.
01:27It is striking in itself how it oscillates between the possibility
01:31that it was an organized subtraction,
01:33that is, they took the minor to the orange tree on purpose
01:36so that later they could take him away from his father and then take him away,
01:40but it categorically discards that idea
01:44when it talks about what could have happened,
01:47because it speaks very potentially,
01:49that there could have been an accident or an event
01:52that has implicated, not necessarily a traffic accident,
01:57that has led them to elucidate a whole maneuver
02:02to be able to hide the...
02:05It doesn't make much sense,
02:08they are trying to put together a puzzle with pieces of jenga,
02:11and for me, at least at that point, it doesn't make sense, I think,
02:14and the other defense lawyers also agree on that point,
02:17there is no concordance, there is no explanation
02:20of how to get from the orange tree to the vehicles,
02:23because obviously, they jump,
02:26they are directly in the orange tree,
02:29they take him to the orange tree on purpose,
02:31and then he appears in the vehicle,
02:33how he appears in the vehicle,
02:35at what moment he disappears from the orange tree
02:37and magically appears in the vehicles,
02:39being that both JosƩ and Catalina,
02:41and also Lodelina,
02:43saw PĆ©rez and Calleva withdraw.
02:45How is it possible that they have organized such a complex plan,
02:48seven people who do not know each other,
02:50and they have organized it telepathically,
02:52because we can't go over something...
02:54They barely got there, they sat down to eat,
02:57and then they went to the orange tree,
02:59they did it telepathically,
03:01but it doesn't make sense to me.
03:03Speaking of sitting down to eat,
03:05do you think Macarena, Camila or JosƩ,
03:08the father of Loan, can contribute something?
03:11And I would like to be able to listen to them,
03:14because I did not have the possibility
03:16to participate in the hearings
03:18of the testimonial statements,
03:20at least of Camila,
03:22and Macarena, if I remember correctly,
03:24because we were also during a summary secret,
03:27and in some parts we could not directly
03:29ask questions to some witnesses
03:31during that summary secret.
03:33What would you ask them?
03:35I would like to know what they can contribute.
03:37Gonzalo, what would you ask, for example,
03:39to the father of Loan?
03:41In a personal way.
03:45In a personal way, well,
03:47I disagree with the position of some of the colleagues
03:50who have already spoken in the media
03:52about what could lead them to ask,
03:54but for me there would be no greater precision
03:57to give regarding what happened.
03:59I could lead them to consult,
04:01to clarify some questions, for example,
04:04if they were not taking it,
04:06which is already obvious,
04:08but they were not taking it.
04:10From what is seen in the photo,
04:12there are only two bottles of wine,
04:14and I also want to discredit that position,
04:17that position regarding that they were all drunk,
04:20or that they wanted to intoxicate the father of Loan
04:23to be able to take him to Loan,
04:25or that PĆ©rez was drunk
04:27and because of that drunkenness,
04:29he choked him.
04:30I want to rule out that.
04:32Although for me they have no way.
04:34What?
04:35Well, today the lawyer Codazzi said
04:37that PĆ©rez was probably drunk
04:41and that insurance would not pay
04:44the homicide or the accident,
04:48that's why...
04:49Don't hold your head.
04:51He said that.
04:52I didn't say it.
04:55He said, but I heard well,
04:57you heard the same as me,
04:59when he said that PĆ©rez was drunk
05:03and that the insurance of the truck
05:05would not cover and it would be millions of pesos
05:09to pay the death of Loan
05:11and that's why he didn't take charge.
05:13That would be a psychopath to be true, right?
05:18No, no, no, that doesn't have either.
05:20I, as a colleague of Codazzi,
05:22I respect him as a colleague
05:24in terms of opinions that can come
05:26to deny respect to the fact itself
05:28that in the Loan case
05:30these factual opinions,
05:32that is, facts and legal opinions
05:34regarding the framework of the facts
05:36in legal conduct, I totally disagree.
05:38For me, he has no idea
05:40what he is raising.
05:41I don't understand how a person
05:43who is so sure of knowing what happened
05:46would say it with total freedom
05:48if he is not part of it.
05:50I don't understand where he gets it from.
05:52I truly respect him as a person,
05:54as a professional,
05:55but I categorically disagree
05:57in what he says regarding facts
05:59and regarding the law itself.
06:03Now, Tito, sorry.
06:05Procedural and substantial.
06:07If the theory or hypothesis
06:09of the accident is not sustained
06:11and you just commented that
06:13it would be impossible to put together
06:15such a spontaneous plan
06:16in the middle of lunch
06:17to take a child,
06:18what is the hypothesis you support?
06:20What could have happened?
06:22Did people come in?
06:23Or did people find him
06:25who is not among the accused,
06:27among the detainees?
06:28What could be the hypothesis?
06:33To be honest,
06:34I have two lines of research
06:36that were not presented,
06:38but I don't want to talk about questions
06:40that I can't prove.
06:41I don't have enough elements
06:43to say with certainty
06:45this happened, that happened.
06:47I disagree with the two hypotheses
06:49that can be raised for now.
06:51They were already ruled out,
06:53the one of treatment
06:55and sexual exploitation
06:57or similar,
06:58maybe the family revenge.
07:00I analyze it a little more,
07:02but at least I rule out the accident
07:04and the subtraction and concealment.
07:06You rule out those two,
07:07but the two lines...
07:08Exactly, I rule out those two.
07:09The two lines that you argue
07:10and that I understand
07:11that you cannot detail.
07:12Do they involve
07:13any of the members
07:14of the Loan family?
07:15I understand that yes.
07:19They could, they could.
07:20I can't assert it,
07:21but they could.
07:22Okay.
07:52Thank you very much for your time.
07:53Thank you very much.
07:54A big hug
07:55and a warm greeting
07:56to the entire audience.