The Oral Criminal Court 1 of Dolores must define for next Monday, February 6 how will you announce the decision on the eight rugbiers accused of killing Fernando Báez Sosa. During these hours, the judges analyze read the verdict with the so-called “operative part” or expand its margin and also read the sentence with a brief review of the foundations of the decision.
When resolving this situation, judges Claudia Castro, Christian Rabaia Y Emiliano Lazzari They must take into account that it is a tiny room and consider the large number of people that were seen in the last hearings as well as the attendance of relatives of the accused and the victim.
Security in the place is a constant concern of the court, to such an extent that the police personnel were increased for the allegations, as well as the Buenos Aires Penitentiary Service (SPB) in charge of transferring the accused. from the City Hall of Unit 6 to the Courts, a distance of just ten blocks. In addition, the fence has been extended, blocking the entire block that includes the main access to the courts.
For all these reasons, the decision has not yet been made how will the verdict be read and if the grounds could also be made known. If this is not the case, the lawyers for both the complainant and the defense and the prosecution will be given the sentence by secretariat so that they can appeal in the future.
The appeals that the parties can make will fall before the Buenos Aires Chamber of Cassation that does not have deadlines to review and issue an eventual ruling that will be issued by Court 1 of Dolores.
Meanwhile, from the Buenos Aires Supreme Court in In recent days they have issued an internal resolution by which they clear the Oral Criminal Court of the rest of the work 1.
In this way, the Supreme Court allowed the Court to have a clear path to write the sentence and decide whether or not to sentence the eight rugby players involved in Fernando’s crime. The prosecutor’s office and the individual victim claim a life sentence for homicide doubly qualified by premeditation and treachery, while the defense raised a minor crime, that of preterintensional homicide or eventual intent.
