On February 2, the Court of Hearings of Santa Rosa, La Pampa, found guilty Magdalena Esposito Valentimother of Lucio Dupuyalready Abigail Páez, his partner at the time of the crime, of the aggravated homicide of a 5-year-old boy, which occurred in November 2021. This Friday, at 12, judges Alejandra Ongaro, Daniel Sáez Zamora and Andrés Olié They will make known the sentences that the murderers will receive. The expectation is centered to know if the magistrates will apply the “undetermined time” to the sentence to life imprisonment that already fits them due to the seriousness of the crime that they were saddled with.
During the audience that took place this Monday, February 13, the prosecutor Veronica Ferrero He asked that the two defendants be sentenced to life imprisonment because, in the face of the crimes committed, the Penal Code provides only for that sentence.
Meanwhile, the plaintiff lawyer representing the Dupuy family, Jose Mario Aguerridoadhered to the proposal of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, but added the requirement that the penalty be indefinite confinementan alternative provided for in article 52 of the Penal Code, in relation to article 80. Its foundations, among other reasons, were based on the extent of the damage caused to “an absolutely vulnerable boy”, adding that Lucio’s crime was the end of a process child abuse.
It may interest you: The neighbor who tried to save Lucio Dupuy spoke: the desperate moments after the crime
For her part, the official defender Silvina Blanco Gomezasked the court to will quantify the penalty that would correspond to Paezfor understanding that if life imprisonment were applied —with the regulations in force today in the country— “He will only get out of jail with his deathsince currently the life sentence is materially and literally perpetual.”
In addition, the lawyer requested that this quantification be the minimum due to the lack of a criminal record and the age of the accused, who is 28 years old. She also stated that the Supreme Court has already set the unconstitutionality of imprisonment for an indefinite period.
Finally, the official defender Paul De Biasiwhen speaking for Esposito Valentioffered similar arguments to his colleague Blanco Gómez and required that he be set “a shame in years”with which he agreed that “Life imprisonment established by the Penal Code is unconstitutional”since “international treaties prevent the application of cruel, inhuman and degrading punishments”.
At this Friday’s hearing, then, It will finally be known if the judges will apply the “indeterminate time” to the safe sentence of life imprisonment. The decision will be broadcast live on the channel Youtube of the Criminal Judicial Office of Santa Rosa.
It may interest you: “I know that he forgave me, I have spiritual contact with him”: the last words of the murderers of Lucio Dupuy before being sentenced
In parallel, a popular mobilization in front of the doors of the judicial center of the pampean capital, convened from 10 o’clock by the “Lucio Dupuy Civil Association”, which was created by the minor’s grandfather, Ramón, to fight for the rights of children, and which will have as its slogan : “Let justice be done. Life imprisonment for the murderers”.
The child’s father, Christian Dupuy; his paternal grandparents, Ramon and silvia gomez; the plaintiff lawyer, seasoned; the team of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, made up of maximum paulucci, Veronica Ferrero, marcos sacco and walter martos; and the advisors for Boys, Girls and Adolescents, Graciela Massara and Gabriela Way.
The defendants are not required to attend the hearing in Santa Rosa and can follow it from San Luis Penitentiary Complex No. 1, where they are detained. In fact, on February 2, when they were found guilty, they did not even follow her remotely: they preferred to continue with their routines in prison. They did the same at the hearing on the 13th.
That day, Esposito Valentithe mother, was declared the material author and criminally responsible for the crime of homicide triple qualified by the link, treachery and cruelty.
It may interest you: “Don’t let your hand go, we’re going to send a shit”: the horror of the chats between those accused of killing Lucio Dupuy
At the same time, Paez was declared the material author and criminally responsible for the crime of doubly qualified homicide for treachery and cruelty; in real contest with the crime of sexual abuse with carnal access anally, aggravated for being the guardian and for having been committed against a minor under 18 years of age, taking advantage of the pre-existing situation of coexistence, as a continuing crime.
Lucio Dupuy was murdered on November 26, 2021 in the house on Allan Kardec street at 2,300 Santa Rosa, where he lived with his mother, Magdalena Esposito Valentiand the woman’s partner, Abigail Paez.
The movements of the murderers and the 5-year-old boy were recorded by a camera located in front of the apartment and, thanks to these images, it was possible to conclude that at 5:32 p.m. Lucio was last seen alive. Between that moment and 7:40 p.m., when both defendants left the property alone, the boy he was brutally beaten.
According to the grounds of the judges’ ruling, Abigail Páez took his girlfriend on a motorcycle to a hotel restaurant in the Pampas capital, where she worked as a waitress, and returned alone at 8:49 p.m., when she tried to revive the child and put him under the shower .
At 9:30 p.m., Páez carried Lucio in his arms to the medical room in the Río Atuel neighborhood, close to his home, but it was closed, so the baby was referred to the Evita Hospital, where at 9:30 p.m. 21.45 it was found that he was already dead.
The Justice established that the two participated in the deadly beating, between 6 and 7 p.m. on November 26, and that the child was punched, kicked, and hit with a stick.
He was also stomped on the back by Páez (it could be determined by the imprint left by his shoe), which caused internal injuries, such as tearing his liver and, in addition, he was bitten in their intimate areas and on his left arm.
The Court of Hearing established that the child was the victim, appellant, of physical, psychological and sexual violence and determined that a “crescendo of violence” could be noticed, in light of the chats between the two defendants, aired during the trial, starting in mid-October 2021.
*With information from Telam
Keep reading:
