Former judge Juliet McIntash It was reported again, the case already has a prosecutor and a judge, so the investigation is progressing, and on this occasion, the charge has been brought by the criminal lawyer. Hugo Lopez Caribero For the trial that took place in mid-2024, where the former judge He would use his cell phone during the hearings.
According to the document sent to Noticias Argentinas, the complaint was submitted within the framework of a trial, before the death Diego Armando Maradonawhere Mackintash was a judge in Criminal Court No. 2 of the Judicial District of San Isidro.
McIntash was denounced for using his cell phone and showing bias during the trial
In June 2024, oral argument against Alejandro Daniel Krodic As specified in the complaint, during the trial, the now-dismissed judge used a cell phone “A clear context for non-compliance with – and mis-performance of – the judicial function it was supposed to exercise – both legally and constitutionally.”
“Dr.In developing the testimony of people presented as witnesses for the defence, McIntash had done so Inappropriate attitudes, apparent bias, irregular nature, and lack of respect for witnesses“describes writing.
In many witness statements, LThe former judge “ignored his statementsAt a time when he did not pay any attention to the statements of citizens on the stage, taking them into consideration His hands – during almost all of these actions – and his cell phone “We don’t know if it’s functional or private.”
Evasion and breach of duties
Despite the lack of interest on the part of the controversial former judge. Krodic Convicted of a crime Sexual assault He is currently located in Prison Unit No. 2 in Sierra Chica. The case is before the Court of Cassation, awaiting its issuance.
Against this background, the family’s current lawyer, Caripiro, confirmed in a conversation with NA that he had convicted McIntashe in court for crimes of breach of duty and malfeasance.
bliss Reason (No. 25-2240-09-14) You already have a prosecutor, it’s about karina bianchi, While it has also been proven that Judge Orlando Diazthe follower Guarantees Court No. 2.
In mid-November, a jury unanimously rejected McIntash over his scandalous role in the documentary about the trial of Maradona’s death.
McIntash breaks the silence: his version of the documentary on Maradona’s death
Former judge Julieta McIntash, recently dismissed from the Oral Criminal Court No. 2 in San Isidro, spoke out for the first time following the jury’s verdict that found her liable for allowing the documentary to be filmed. “divine justice” During the trial of Diego Maradona’s death. According to the former judge, the audio-visual project initiative It didn’t come from her.But from a friend.
In a television interview, McIntash stated that the recorded material was a “teaser and pilot” and not a finished documentary. She said that her friend first mentioned the idea of producing a documentary, and then the possibility of producing a documentary series, although she stressed that this development had “no relation at all” to her participation.
The former judge stated that on February 14, during a friend’s birthday, she met a Maradona fan who showed interest in photographing the justice’s work. According to McIntash, after his departure, both They started talking about “showing justice through me.” The next day, her friend called her to tell her they wanted to portray an “incorruptible, honest and transparent” justice. “What a mockery“, commented the former judge.
Before moving forward, he said he consulted with a trusted figure “at the institutional level.” According to his account, he obtained permission on one condition: not to publish any content that would affect the judicial process, and to photograph only before or after the sessions.
McIntash insisted there was no secrecy. He confirmed that the cameras were visible from the first day of the trial, when the formal hearings had not yet begun and the process was broadcast publicly. He also pointed out that his interview for the project took place on Sunday, outside court hours, and far from any stage of discussion: “I did not interrupt my duties and everything was within sight.”
Regarding those who claim they were not aware of the existence of audio-visual devices, McIntash was frank: “All parties were aware that it would be recorded. Mario Baudry was allowed to film. They came with a giant tripod… Everyone saw it“.