The murder trial of Cecilia Strzyzowski entered its final phase in a climate of extreme expectations. However, the verdict did not arrive. After six hours of deliberations, and after a long day that kept the province of Chaco in a state of suspense, the popular jury reported that it had not reached the necessary consensus to resolve the criminal responsibility of the seven defendants. Judge Dolly Fernandez then ordered a recess until 8am on Saturday.
The decision surprised the parties who were waiting for the definition until the last minute. Ricardo Osuna, Emerenciano Sena’s defense attorney, confirmed to Narcotics Anonymous that the jury was split. He stressed that they “did not reach an agreement,” and hinted at the possibility that there was an “internal relationship between them.” He also stated that his client, like the other defendants, awaits sentencing “with the same anxiety felt by the community.”
Friday’s session began early, at eight o’clock, at the Center for Judicial Studies of the Resistance. This was the last day of discussion before deliberation and was devoted to the defendant’s last words, the reading of instructions, and the jury’s retirement. The judge offered the seven defendants the opportunity to express themselves before the panel decided on charges of femicide, cover-up, necessary participation, and other charges related to Cecilia’s disappearance and death, which occurred in June 2023.
Authoritarians don’t like this
The practice of professional and critical journalism is an essential pillar of democracy. This is why it bothers those who believe they are the bearers of the truth.
The twelve-member committee began its deliberations around noon, minutes before 1 p.m. The law specifies a period of no less than two hours for internal discussion, but this period can be extended as long as the possibility of reaching an agreement remains. The prosecution pointed out that in cases of this complexity, the jury has a margin of up to eleven days to reach a unanimous verdict, although it is usual for the decision to arrive on the same day.
As the hours passed, the weather outside the building became more severe. At 5 p.m., the parties were called back into the room because the jury had a question that needed clarification. This call fueled expectations and generated a movement among those who followed the trial from the street. Some motorists honked their car horns as they passed, and Argentine flags were seen waving in the rain that began shortly after.
Deliberations progressed, but consensus did not arrive. The court stated that they needed more time and the judge decided to suspend the day and resume deliberations on Saturday with the same integrity.
Final words. At the beginning of the marathon session, the seven defendants had the opportunity to say their final words.
Cesar Cena was the first to take the microphone. The judge asked him if he wanted to add anything to what his defense had previously mentioned, but the young man vehemently denied it and replied: “No, Your Honor.”
His father, Emerenciano Senna, also decided to intervene briefly. He answered without further details or questioning the investigation, as he did during the debate: “I am innocent, Your Honor. Thank you.”
The most comprehensive statement within the family nucleus was made by Marcela Acuña, Cesar’s mother. He began by asserting his innocence, stressing that he was “a person who would not harm another human being.”
He said that the case was “mediated” and that there was a “political use” of the events. She stressed that she wants “the truth to prevail over any decision that is taken,” and expanded the scope of this claim to include the situations that other women go through, according to her opinion. He noted that many prisoners suffer from “double punishment and double social punishment,” as a sex requirement is added to imprisonment.
He also questioned the development of the case, saying that it “started on the basis of a lie with illegal arrests since the ninth,” and added that “the criminal is today in power, in the executive authority.”
Then it was the turn of José Gustavo Obregon, who decided to speak out and focused his statement on apology. He addressed the judge and jury with the words: “I apologize if, by my omission, it was never my intention to hurt or attack anyone.” He explained that he accompanied Cesar Senna “as I have done countless times because of the love, respect and endless gratitude I have towards his parents,” whom he described as “the main pillars of my life and the life of my family.”
For her part, Fabiana Cecilia Gonzalez did not speak. Griselda Reynoso decided to speak, although it was very brief. He said: “With all the respect his position and person deserve, I am not responsible for what they blame me for and I declare my innocence.”
The last person to speak was Gustavo Melgarejo. Unlike Acuña or Obregón, he did not expand the scope of his intervention. He stressed that he had nothing more to add and simply said: “I have already said everything I had to say.”
After hearing all the defendants, the judge ended the final session and ordered that the instructions be read to the popular jury before the start of deliberations. It was 9:28 am. At that time no one expected such a long day and such an uncertain end.
About The Author
