Maradona Trial: Judge Denies Documentary Authorization

He Judgment for Maradona’s death It was aimed. And although it advanced at a slow pace, I did it constantly and neat. However, an unexpected scandal unleashed at the last audience made, from one moment to the other, the role of a judge was questioned and, consequently, the possible Risk of continuity of the debate.

“This trial It is a reflection of Diego’s very life. It seems that everything is good and suddenly not, ”defined a judicial source to Infobae The situation unleashed last Thursday, when one of the three members of the TOC No. 3 of San Isidro remained in the sight of justice for alleged irregularities.

It’s about Julieta Makintach, who is now being investigated for having alleged efforts, coordination or negotiations with audiovisual producers Interested in the oral debate where the future of seven accused of the death of the ten will be defined.

The case opened after a criminal complaint made by lawyers Fernando Burlando and Mario Baudry -Represenants of Dalma, Gianinna and Dieguito Fernando Maradona, respectively- who pointed out that this possible commission of facts without consent from the parties could configure “Crimes of Public Action” that affect the criminal process.

The aforementioned crimes were Abuse of authority, prevaricate, revelation of secrets, influence peddling, bribery and breach of public official’s duties.

“It’s nonsense. There is no documentary, there is no contract. I have nothing to hide, but Do not question or my prestige or my honesty“Mackintach clarified in dialogue with Infobae about the complaint against him.

The alleged link of the magistrate with audiovisual producers officially reached the trial at the hearing on Thursday, when Julio Rivas, Leopoldo Luque‘s lawyerhe asked the court outraged.

However, This rumor travels the halls of the Ituzaingó street palace From the first day. And when I was mentioned alive by the defender, he caused the surprise of all those present in the room. Particularly from the three judges, who for the first time since the beginning of the debate were shown uncomfortable with the situation.

It should be noted that none of this would have stopped not being for The striking scene starred by the magistrates themselves At the beginning of Thursday’s day, which baffled all parties and generated as much confusion as a stir.

The episode had to do with a sudden change of the members of the court in their roles. In this rotation, the indicated judge went from performing as a vowel to occupy the role of coordinator of the debate, that until now did Maximiliano Savarino. That is, that it became the person who Directs the interrogations and analyzes evidence presented, among other functions.

The explanation was that the change responded to “An administrative issue”, Although this did not convince any of the parties. Consequently, there was protest: both lawyers and fiscal said they had never seen such a situation in their years of career and claimed that the debate It is still directed by Judge Savarino, as until now.

The climate of the audience room He turned tense And the judges were surprised at the almost unanimous resistance of all parties to this rotation.

In the arguments expressed by the lawyers and representatives of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, many pointed out that the decision to change the positions could put the validity of the debate at risk.

And that was when Luque and Cosachov’s lawyers directly pointed against Judge Makitanch: They assured that it already has a preconcept of the accused, that their partiality is conditioned and that they warn that “by mode, the gestures and contents of their questions is advancing a verdict”so they did not agree that the trial now coordinated.

In this context, the Neurosurgeon defender put on the table The question of the alleged documentary that would also be filming in the audiences under the knowledge of the magistrate, who would have authorized two or more people to collect audiovisual material from the trial without the consent of the parties.

Then, the lawyer pointed to a man and a woman who were in the public and asked to be identified because they would be the infiltrated assumptions.

Both had to make their documents available to the entire Chamber: They said they were independent writers who were going to see the audiences simply for interest. They denied being part of some production or being recording with the guarantee of the magistrate.

The judge, on the other hand, ensures that there is no evidence to hold the accusation against her because there was no agreement with anyone and states that The continuity of the trial is not at risk.

The story will continue on Tuesday, when the debate for the death of Maradona resumes and the novelties are known in this regard.