Press "Enter" to skip to content

The strategy to unlink Carolina Píparo from …

The Buenos Aires legislator Carolina Píparo testified tonight as a witness, before the prosecutor Maria Eugenia Di Lorenzo. For Di Lorenzo it is clear that the robbery existed, but he does not accept significant evidence: the kidnapping and opening of the cell phones of Píparo, her husband and the Secretary of Security of the Municipality of La Plata. The convocation of Píparo It was controversial because although she did not drive the vehicle, it seems clear that she had some participation and was not a simple witness.

A good part of the judicial-municipal apparatus that intervenes in the case seems very close to macrismo and his performance was more than doubtful, starting with the fact that Píparo or her husband were not tested for breath alcohol, Juan Ignacio Buzali, and then the videos of the three key moments of the event were edited: the robbery, the run over and the subsequent dragging of the motorcycle.

On Tuesday night, the judge Marcela garmendia rejected the challenge presented by the lawyer Martin de Vargas, representative of one of those run over, Luis Lavalle. The lawyer argued that Garmendia’s son has a position in the Municipality of La Plata, governed by Cambiemos, precisely where the Secretary of Security is also, Darius Ganduglia, who did not do the breathalyzer and appeared surprisingly defending Píparo at the scene. Regarding the prosecutor Di Lorenzo, she is close to the attorney Julio Conte Grand, another judicial official aligned with the macrismo. The network seems to act defending on the one hand Píparo and on the other Ganduglia, a possible candidate for mayor of La Plata for a sector of Together for Change.

In this framework of political suspicions, the summons of Píparo as a witness draws attention:

* For the prosecutor it is clear that he was the victim of a robbery and that is why he made a separate case with that fact. According to reports, there is a private camera in the place where the attack occurred, but they say that the images are very bad and you can hardly see anything.

* There is a relevant question. In the block where the robbery occurred, no witnesses saw or heard anything. It is true that it was January 1 at 2 in the morning. But there is the hypothesis that Píparo lied about the characteristics of what happened. Perhaps it was not six motorcycle jets, armed, as reported by the legislator, but a snatch of cell phone and wallet, common in CABA and Greater Buenos Aires. The deputy would have enlarged the events later to justify the subsequent outrage.

* In the run over of motorcyclists, the responsibility cannot be attributed to Píparo because it was her husband who was driving.

* But, later, the legislator and her husband did not give the minimum assistance to those who were run over and surely in that it cannot be argued that the deputy was only a witness. Furthermore, she holds the position of Secretary for Victim Assistance of the Municipality of La Plata.

* The motorcycle was dragged along several blocks, something that Píparo had to avoid. Yesterday, images taken by a camera installed on a soccer field appeared: the legislator’s vehicle was seen at high speed, with the motorcycle under the wheels and the sparks produced by the drag. At the end, in a curve, the bike was thrown. Everything was more than violent.

In the last 48 hours, the strategy of separating the legislator from her husband was perceived. Lawyer Fernando Mocking he insisted several times with that point. Perhaps in the sights is the idea that Píparo aimed to be the head of the list of deputies of Together for Change in the Province of Buenos Aires and they are trying to establish that she was like a kind of passive observer.

Before noon this Wednesday, one of the policemen who attended to Buzali and Píparo at the 1st Police Station again declared. He confirmed something of what had already been declared before the Investigations Department: that the deputy and her husband went to the police station’s bathroom five times and that Buzali later asked for a bucket to clean, indicating that he vomited. In this he coincided with what was indicated by the witness, Sara, who also stated that a strong ethyl odor was perceived. But the officer added a striking term: “Buzali was stiff.” In the case of a commissioner, that is to say someone with a lot of experience, he wanted to say that he seemed affected by some narcotic drug, but when they insisted that he specify what he was saying, he limited himself to reiterating “he was rigid”.

* An additional indication is that Buzali and his wife crashed three other cars in their mad race and even drove the vehicle, at high speed and in the wrong direction, in front of the 4th police station. They allege that they were chasing the motorcycle jets, perhaps guided by Apple’s cell phone recovery program that indicates where the device is. After five days, the prosecutor Di Lorenzo still did not indict anyone for any crime. At least for now, it all sounds too much like they are covering things up.

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *