He was initially examined Pablo Atchabahian and then Miguel Angel CalveteBoth are accused of serving as “parastatal” directors in the National Disability Agency (Andis). Then it was my turn Diego Spagnuoloformer head of the organization and alleged author of the bribery audios. He followed him Daniel Garbellinithe other officer who was thrown out when the case exploded. Nobody said anything.
As if there was an agreement, there was also silence during the investigations against nine other defendants: the former civil servants Lorena Di Giorno; the alleged external operators Luciana Ferrari And Federico Santich; the couple from Calvete, Guadalupe Muñozand the directors of the companies that would have benefited from the maneuver, Patrick Rama, Naomi Ruth Lozano, Andres Arnaudo, Silvana Escudero And Alejandro Gaston Fuentes Acosta
The persistent silence observed by Justice in recent weeks and the communal and emotional bonds between the people under investigation cast doubt on the existence of a pact of silence to avoid Justice revealing details about the maneuver he was reviewing.
“We are a family“Atchabahian described in the WhatsApp group he shared with Garbellini and Rama, among others, where progress in starting business with the state was exchanged.
“Thank you for being together and building what we all want. Four more years of management. Then everyone to Tenerife,” said Atchabahian, who is in preventive detention at his home in Mendoza.
The defenders of those targeted by the justice system They deny having outlined a common strategy of mutual protection. However, they admit that there were different contacts between them over the course of the case.
Some of the most recent communications were made “as a courtesy” to congratulate Spagnuolo’s attorney, Mauricio D’Alessandrobased on the decision of the Federal Chamber, on his suggestion, to order the judge Sebastian Casanello to investigate the origin of the audio recordings that sparked the scandal, a strategy that was launched Martin Magramthe defender of the Kovalivker family, owners of Suizo Argentina, which Spagnuolo later joined.
However, no one is talking about coordinated planning. One lawyer explained that his client’s decision not to testify was due to eliminating the possibility of a misstep during oral testimony, but that after further analysis of the allegation, he was eventually able to provide a written defense.
However, the majority remain so The decision not to make a statement is the “natural” consequence of not having access to everything that has been done.. You represent that the file is a series of confidential files, the contents of which are unknown. And no one recommends testifying without knowing what collected evidence is included in the file.
The mystery and concern became even clearer last Monday when the former Andis official Roger Grant He explained this, tearing apart the cloak of silence that had spread over the maneuver under investigation.
Grant, who was the emergency management coordinator and responsible for purchases in the internal system under investigation, reportedly claimed to the judge and prosecutor that he was his boss. Garbelliniwho ran the operation and explained everything he had to do.
According to the audio recordings that led to the case, Garbellini was the person who would have infiltrated the agency Eduardo “Lule” Menemthe right hand of Karina Milei.
News of the accusation against Garbellini raised alarm for the defense because Grant’s statement was not uploaded to the system to which all parties have access.
“It is not known what he said”said a lawyer during the week. “There is no such thing as a semi-secret summary,” complained another, alluding to Grant, the reserved files and the silence.
He testified alongside Grant in the case Eduardo “Pino” Gonzalezwho was also fired from the agency after the scandal. But González did not target anyone in particular, judicial circles said, and limited himself to denying the facts.
camera
The Federal Chamber’s decision brought some relief for the defense, some of whom were surprised by the speed of the filing. This was in response to a suggestion from Magram, the attorney for the Kovalivker family. He claimed that everything done in the case should be canceled as the origin of the audio recordings was unknown. First before Judge Casanello and then in federal court.
The Chamber II judges gave him reason when, without dropping the case, they ordered on Thursday to clarify the origin of the recordings, which is currently being investigated. Spagnuolo adopted this strategy while represented as an official defender Florence squareshis second defense in this case. This course would later be confirmed with the arrival of D’Alessandro.
Before Thursday’s verdict, the lawyer warned the board in a letter that the audio recordings were “false” and that the prosecutor Franco Picardi He included them in two of the three pieces of evidence he identified early in the case when he decided to open the investigation.
About The Author
