👉 Antonio Benítez, sospechoso clave en la desaparición de Loan Danilo Peña, realizó su tercera declaración desde prisión. Benítez apuntó contra dos de los detenidos y su suegra.
👉 Seguí en #AndinoYLasNoticias
👉 Seguí en #AndinoYLasNoticias
Category
🗞
NewsTranscript
00:00Loan, the question that has been there for almost six months, where is Loan, one of the protagonists of this case, the one who is in prison, to whom at some point Germán has signed as the supplier, we are talking about Benítez, what happened to him in the last hours?
00:17Benítez declared, he declared yesterday, it was the third statement of the supplier union, because it is the one that was closest to Loan in the orange area, Benítez is now represented, he was represented until a long time ago by Dr. Osuna, who has already left the cause
00:34Is it true that Benítez cried?
00:35Yes, he cried and we have the exclusive images to share them, look, he broke, he broke talking about his son, it was more or less an inquiry, a statement of 30 minutes
00:48What can you ask after six months to a man suspected of making a boy disappear?
00:55In this inquiry it was done by Suma, through the penitentiary service where he is housed, only he wanted to answer the questions of his lawyer, Dr. Enzo Di Tella, who is an official lawyer, he gives it to the state, these lawyers are no longer there
01:08You said Dr. Osuna, I think we once asked him live how they paid him, is Dr. Osuna there?
01:15Yes, now we are going to talk
01:16Well, Dr. Osuna is no longer in the cause, surely he followed until recently the last statements, now Dr. Di Tella is there, and he only asked Dr. Di Tella basically who he distrusted
01:30Who he distrusted
01:33The first time he says this, he distrusted Pérez Icaillava and Catalina, my mother-in-law, he distrusted Grandma Catalina, he says that when he returns at night, already with Loan disappeared, the marriage of Pérez Icaillava was drinking mate with Grandma and talking
01:51When Benítez approaches in the middle of the search for Loan, already disappeared on June 13 at night, they remain silent, as if not to continue in that dialogue that Benítez interprets, they were perjuring or plotting something, my instinct is that they have something to do
02:07Repeat, who, when you say they, who?
02:09Pérez Icaillava, the marriage of the municipal official Pérez and him, Marino Icaillava
02:20In the statement that arose, it arises that Grandma Catalina knew something else, again that theory is installed that Grandma knows something more than she told, but everything starts to be directed in some way, the looks at what is the marriage of Pérez Icaillava
02:44In theory of accident, in theory of kidnapping, that is not clear, but it was fundamental, I tell you yesterday, of the three testimonies that Benítez had, of the three statements, yesterday we can say that it is the most important and the one that begins to guide in some way an investigative line in the cause
02:58Well, and at the time it was also said, with reference to the commissioner of 9 July, Maciel, that the first tasks related to the investigation had aimed more than anything to mislead, to help the search for Loan
03:16And do you remember that supposedly there had been an exhortation to the people not to march and to go to their homes because it was going to be a task of the police to solve this quickly, which supposedly could be solved quickly or in the next hours of that 13th of June
03:34Yes, the process was processed and for which the lawyer Vallejos presented a resource, which will have to be, let's say, for the process, what you understand, what are those 1075 sheets of the processing act is plagued with irregularities, and Dr. Vallejos presents that as a resource to back up Walter Maciel's process as the rest of the lawyers did
03:59Let's see, Dr. Richard Vallejos is precisely the lawyer of Commissioner Maciel, how are you Richard, thank you for attending us
04:06Hello, how are you, good morning to you and good morning to all the viewers
04:11Doctor, what is the situation of Maciel, where is he detained, remind us a little
04:20Mr. Maciel is detained at the Federal Complex of Marcos Paz, Buenos Aires Province
04:29In this really sinister plot, he always indicated it as part of an organization that ends up making Aloan disappear
04:42What does your defendant say about this, six months after not being sure about the little one?
04:49Well, what he always said is that, well, he is totally innocent of this fact that is being investigated, right? He is totally alien to this situation
05:03The truth is that we do not really have a certainty, and we are not in a position to affirm one of the many hypotheses that has been handled
05:15Not so many hypotheses, there are two or three basically, but at this moment we are not in a position to affirm what actually happened
05:26The justice is indicating him as the kidnapper of the boy
05:34The accusation is subtraction or containment of the minor by real favor, all this aggravated by his condition as a public official
05:42And in that sense, I would like to ask you, you talk about nullities or irregularities in terms of processing, which is the most complex thing that all the detainees have received in the last instance
05:56Why both the judge and the prosecutors do not have elements from their point of view, doctor, to impute these accusations?
06:04Very good question. First of all, I want to tell you that for the judge, Walter Maciel is a necessary participant
06:18Which for this defense seems absolutely incomprehensible to me, in addition, it took us by surprise just the moment or at this moment that he made this decision
06:32When, for example, this defense has not even requested a lack of merit, a discharge or something like that, since they are rights that basically correspond to the defendant
06:42But even so, understanding that it is not the right time to process it, none of these issues or any of these institutes were requested
06:53That we, as defense lawyers, have that possibility. So it took us by surprise this decision that the judge has made
07:01The judge places him as a necessary participant in the subtraction and concealment. When it is proven that he is a necessary participant, it is impossible that he is, because he was not in the right place
07:24He was not in the right place, that is more than likely. He did not participate in the lunch, he was not in the place
07:30He did not have dilatory attitudes during the investigation at night?
07:33He did not generate a ground for him to be able to act for hours and then go to know what happened in Loa's life
07:44But that clear gap between noon and night, and that supposedly liberated ground, is imposed on Maciel, which was like the law there on July 9
07:59Of course, at that time, like any ordinary citizen, he was in his break time. The figure of the necessary participant, as you know, is a fundamental contribution without which the author could not have consumed the fact
08:18That is the type of objective that requires the primary or necessary participation. Now I wonder, how did Maciel do to be a necessary participant or co-author? Or how did he do to cover the crime when he, as soon as he arrives at the place, orders the arrest or has or delays the first three detainees?
08:41There is talk of altering traces, evidence. Obviously, this is a cause that every day has different hypotheses and different versions. But it was also said that at the time he intimidated neighbors so that they would not leave.
08:55But it was also said that at the time he intimidated neighbors so that they would not leave.
09:17Well, you are saying later, even you yourself are saying later. So that tells us that in fact, at the time the minor was lost, he was not in the place. That is more than clear, that he was not in the place of the fact.
09:39And you have to take into account that at the beginning, when the investigation was still at the headquarters of the ordinary justice, we were not even in the presence of a presumed criminal act. And one very important thing to take into account, not even the prosecutor, who is the head of the criminal action, places Maciel as a necessary participant, but places him as a cover.
10:08And one very important thing to take into account, not even the prosecutor, who is the head of the criminal action, places him as a necessary participant, but places him as a cover.
10:36And one very important thing to take into account, not even the prosecutor, who is the head of the criminal action, places him as a necessary participant, but places him as a cover.
11:06And one very important thing to take into account, not even the prosecutor, who is the head of the criminal action, places him as a necessary participant, but places him as a cover.
11:32Well, as you are well manifesting, even the judge herself in her ruling speaks of the possibility of a traffic accident. Even she does not rule out the possibility of a traffic accident.
11:46Now, then, we have to evaluate certain issues. Either we believe Audelina completely or we do not believe her directly. Obviously, in one part she does believe her and in other parts she does not.
12:01Now, then, we have to evaluate certain issues. Either we believe Audelina completely or we do not believe her directly. Obviously, in one part she does believe her and in other parts she does not.
12:16Now, then, we have to evaluate certain issues. Either we believe Audelina completely or we do not believe her directly. Obviously, in one part she does believe her and in other parts she does not.
12:31Now, then, we have to evaluate certain issues. Either we believe Audelina completely or we do not believe her directly. Obviously, in one part she does believe her and in other parts she does not.
12:59But the situation of Decodasi, of Audelina, being threatened in some way, led to falsely declare, that is not incorporated in this cause. It runs in an annexed cause that does not advance in that sense.
13:19It is not in another cause. It is in this cause. In fact, the journalists have access to it.
13:44But the other cause of Decodasi, which I do not have the number here, but it is a different cause, runs another way.
13:52No, no, no. This runs in this cause. She takes part of that declaration in this cause. No, no, no. This is the main file.
14:03It is incorporated in the Lexien. This cause, this statement, this testimonial is incorporated in the Lexien.
14:12In addition, when this happens to the ordinary justice, on July 5, Audelina declares in federal justice and repeats exactly the same as what she said here at the headquarters of the ordinary justice, exactly the same, on July 5 of that same year.
14:36If you allow me to return to your defendant, in one of the first statements he had said, Lohan was not lost. Could you inquire, based on that statement, what did Maciel mean when he said, Lohan was not lost?
14:51And how did he know it faithfully? How could he affirm it so taxatively?
14:55Look, there are issues that at this time it is not convenient to make any kind of affirmation regarding those issues.
15:08The point is that at the beginning of this investigation we were not, not even Maciel could have knowledge that we were facing a presumed crime.
15:18In fact, in fact, the case begins with the abandonment of a person.
15:23If we go a little further in the matter, the abandonment of a person would not only be for the people who took care of the missing child at that time, but also the abandonment of a person.
15:37We are going to go a little further and in this case the father of the missing child would have to be tried.
15:42Why do you say that, doctor?
15:43Because at the beginning of this investigation, they were looking for a lost child. There was not even a cover.
15:56For ordinary justice.
15:58For ordinary justice.
16:00So that people, the first three detainees, remain in effective prison, a temporary cover was put on them, which was the cover of the abandonment of a person,
16:15because otherwise they could not continue to be detained.
16:20So a temporary cover was put on them, worth the redundancy, for the abandonment of a person.
16:26At what point, I mean, how can Commissioner Maciel be a necessary participant in a fact that was not even being investigated at the beginning as a presumed crime?
16:40In fact, it is perfectly known, and that is accredited both in the fiscal dictation and also so it is held by His Excellency,
16:50that the arrival of the missing child instead of the fact was not foreseen, it was not even scheduled.
16:58The father arrives by surprise and that arises from the different testimonials and from the different reports,
17:05from the various investigations that were carried out in the course of this investigation.
17:11But I insist again.
17:13Why did you arrest Benítez that night if what was being talked about was the disappearance of a person or the search?
17:21How did I not understand your question?
17:24Of course, he arrests Benítez Maciel.
17:27We were still in an instance where there was no visibility of a possible kidnapping.
17:33Why did you make the decision? Based on what? How was the conversation in that sense with your superiors?
17:39I repeat to you, the first cover that is given is the abandonment of a person.
17:44And they needed to put a cover on them to be able to maintain the detention of this person.
17:53Otherwise, they would all have to have been completely free.
17:56Well, even the first three arrested at least.
17:59They must necessarily be given a legal qualification so that later the prosecutor,
18:06we have an accusatory system, so that the prosecutor can request the warrant judge,
18:12detention or preventive detention of a person.
18:15We have to put a cover and specify what crime we are investigating.
18:21Which is the need.
18:24Yes.
18:26Why did Maciel take pictures of the boys at school according to testimonies from the people of 9 July?
18:35That is false. The truth is that this does not appear in any part of the file.
18:40Absolutely, that is false.
18:42No, let's see.
18:44It does not appear in the file.
18:47It does not appear in the file.
18:49But there are people who at first dared to speak, as if doing a catharsis,
18:54that in addition to being Maciel a tough guy who imposed the law and who was afraid of him,
19:00he also took pictures of the boys at school.
19:03We have heard from more than one person.
19:06Do you categorically deny this?
19:09I categorically deny it.
19:11And if a person has something to prove, to prove or has something to contribute,
19:18it can be presented.
19:20That is what justice is for, it can be presented,
19:23provide your data and your testimony of where that question arises.
19:28And another very important thing to clarify,
19:31the fact that Mr. Maciel is demanding,
19:35with the documentation of the vehicles, of the motorcycles to be able to circulate,
19:38that in no way makes him a criminal or makes him
19:43like the person who has committed this abhorrent act that is being investigated.
19:48Yesterday Benítez stated that Loan's brother, I understand that it is Mariano,
19:53because he did not name him,
19:55they were heard in the neighborhood, in the neighborhood, in the town,
19:58comments that strange things were going on.
20:00There was always talk of a narco plot linked, perhaps, eventually, to Mariano.
20:05You had the opportunity to talk to who was the highest legal authority in the town
20:12and if that ever came together as a possibility that Loan's disappearance
20:17is linked to a revenge, I don't know if narco-trans or something like that.
20:23No, from my point of view, no.
20:26And from the patient's?
20:28I think that is absolutely ruled out,
20:31what is the narco plot and the trata plot,
20:36and I don't remember other things that are said there,
20:42let's say, at the media level, I mean in terms of information.
20:49I think the one who had the opportunity to incorporate a matter of drug trafficking
20:58was the testimony of Gustavo Vera,
21:03who, no matter how little, does not end up being impeached for false testimony,
21:09that in fact he intended or intends to join as a believer in the cause and was rejected.
21:19It is ruled out.
21:21The narco plot is ruled out.
21:23The kidnapping hypothesis is ruled out.
21:25The accident is practically ruled out,
21:28but there is no evidence other than the DNA in the truck.
21:33What can we infer?
21:36They asked for the lagoon to be drained.
21:39What can we infer?
21:41Because the truth is that if justice has nothing,
21:43we who are trying to collaborate from the media,
21:46with Loan's disappearance since June 13,
21:48we don't know where to point either.
21:51I want to clarify that I, as a defense lawyer,
21:54do not rule out the hypothesis of the accident.
21:57I do not rule it out.
21:59Yes, but it is illogical, doctor, because...
22:02The judge, at this moment,
22:05that is a criterion that she has, right?
22:09And they have stopped in some failures that she mentions.
22:14What her resolution basically says is that,
22:17even if we are facing a crime of subtraction or concealment,
22:23or maybe we are facing the hypothesis of the accident,
22:28the issue of competition will no longer be evaluated,
22:32because according to the various failures that she mentions,
22:37she says that changing from federal justice back to ordinary justice
22:43would be harmful to the investigation.
22:46Of course.
22:48There are seven people who do not say what happened.
22:51He stepped on it, and the body is in such a place.
22:54Exactly, it gives the feeling that for Maciel and the police
22:58who worked with him, if this had been a traffic accident,
23:02the case would have been solved on time.
23:04Or it can be solved now too.
23:06Obviously, but I say at that moment,
23:08especially because we assume that there is a lot of prior experience
23:11for the police in terms of the discernment
23:13that this is a traffic accident, or this is the subtraction,
23:18assuming that Maciel has nothing to do with it, as you say,
23:21or this is the subtraction of a minor.
23:24It seems to me that it could have been solved on the same day.
23:29Well, but that is a question that is handled, in this case,
23:34in provincial justice.
23:37I, on numerous occasions, stressed and said
23:45that there was a very important person in this case,
23:50which is the prosecutor Castillo, who did not take the true dimension
23:55of what was happening, and, let's say,
24:00he did not take the necessary measures to clarify this fact.
24:06In fact, as soon as this issue occurs,
24:11when the police or when Commissioner Maciel
24:14learns of this fact, he immediately asks for the arrest of Laudelina,
24:18which the prosecutor did not do,
24:21understanding that it was convenient at that time
24:24to have her as a witness to Laudelina and not as a defendant,
24:29because as a witness she had the obligation to declare,
24:32and, on the other hand, being as a defendant,
24:35she does not have that obligation to declare.
24:38She can declare or not, or abstain.
24:41Let's see, it is clear.
24:44Two things happened here.
24:47The fact could have been minimized for those who had nothing to do,
24:52to think that it was a lost boy in the middle of an orange tree,
24:57for, I repeat, those, including some who could be
25:00in that family lunch and who did not participate,
25:04but reality showed something that we still do not know,
25:09that Lohan is not among us, that we have been going for six months,
25:14and that in this context, believing that it was a traffic accident
25:19is like taking us by surprise, right?
25:22Because, I reiterate, it seems to be the hypothesis
25:25that could have been resolved faster if Pérez and Cahillaba
25:28were the protagonists of this accident,
25:31which in a framework, I do not know, that he handled,
25:34could be drunk, and because of the social shame
25:39that this could entail, he did not say it at first.
25:42I do not know.
25:44The reality is that today we are about to celebrate
25:47six months without Lohan and, unfortunately,
25:50we do not have a certain science or faithfully the hypothesis
25:53of what happened, or at least the accurate facts, right?
25:57Well, I have something to say.
26:00I think this is the first time I have had a communication
26:05with this media, and I am going to say something
26:09that I have never said in other media.
26:12I think, I'm not going to say who, but I think that,
26:17apart from Maciel, in this fact that is being investigated,
26:21there are even two more people who are unjustly detained.
26:24That's what I have to say.
26:27I imagine that...
26:30Millapi and Ramírez.
26:36No, I'm not going to say who, as I told you,
26:39but I never said this, but yes.
26:42Dr. Vallejo, thank you for this contact.
26:45Thank you very much, doctor. Thank you very much.