Giannina Maradona pointed out against Judge McIntash in the jury: “She swore to me that they were not filming”

The process that evaluates a judge’s behavior Juliet McIntash She had a short but intense hearing this Wednesday, marked by an atmosphere of extreme tension: Giannina Maradona’s statementdaughter Diego Armando MaradonaWho spoke of his disappointment with the suspended judge. The judge, accused of abuse of power and poor performance, faces trial over her alleged participation in filming the documentary Divine justice During the trial.

The hearing was held in the Senate Chamber Annex in La Plata and was to be decided by an 11-member jury. If the judge is punished or removed. Giannina appeared as a witness and said, visibly moved: “We just wanted to know the truth about our father’s death. I didn’t want the trial to stop.“.

In addition to the former football player’s daughters, Wednesday’s hearing included other relevant testimony. Among them are those of José Arnal, partner of the production company La Doble, responsible for the documentary; Juan “El Chavo” D’Emilio, a clerk and associate of someone close to the judge; and Maria Lea Aleman, McIntash’s childhood friend and one of the project’s promoters.

Maradona’s youngest daughter described the “disappointment” she felt when she discovered that while the investigation into her father’s death was being prepared, the documentary was being prepared. Divine justicepresumably with McIntash’s approval. “I called her, and the only thing I asked her was about the documentary and He denied that they were filming it. I believed in her as a woman. When I saw everything, I wanted to die“, he expressed during his testimony in the trial against the suspended judge.

At the end of her testimony, she asked the youngest daughter of ten Out of respect for his father’s memory She recalled a painful incident: “I asked the prosecutor not to display a photo of my deceased father, and I do not understand how this could be seen.” He also reiterated his desire for justice: “The only thing I hope is that the truth will be found and that those who have to pay will pay.”

What did Julietta McIntash say in her statement?

The judge’s impeachment trial revolves around her alleged involvement in the documentary Divine justiceFilmed during the judicial process for the death of Diego Armando Maradona. Through a narrative focusing on the judge’s gaze, the production was questioned because it represented an unwarranted interference in a trial of enormous public sensitivity and, because of doubts about its impact on the integrity of the court, invalidated oral argument.

At this point he denied his existence Direct intervention in documentary film making He maintained that he never knew its text or the details of its content. She explained that the suggestion came from a friend who asked her to give an interview about her personal life and career within the judiciary: “I did not see that this could have any consequences for me. I went to court and never spoke to anyone again.“, he announced to the jury.

Moreover, he insisted on it There was no secret maneuver And that his behavior was always transparent. According to their account, the members of the court were aware of the existence of the project, as it was in a group of WhatsApp Messages circulated about the recordings: “My colleagues learned about the documentary,” while he described the controversy as “an error in judgment” and “media mockery” against him.

Maradona case: McIntash denounces Savarino for ‘aggravated perjury’

In his defence, McIntash claimed he was Victim of a disproportionate processMotivated by interests outside the issue, repeat it It was the only purpose “Search for the truth“ In the file Due to the death of Maradona. In addition, he blamed his colleague Maximiliano Savarino, whom he denounced for “perjury” after he linked it to an alleged attempt to cover up the filming of the documentary and irregularities surrounding its production.

Supported by her version of the facts, the judge’s defense attempts to prove that there was no bad faith or breach of duties, but rather a misinterpretation of her actions.

M.F.

that.