Gustavo Castillo and Eduardo Murillo
Newspaper La Jornada
Thursday, September 22, 2022, p. 8
The defense of former prosecutor Jesús Murillo Karam filed two requests for amparo, one against the order linking him to the process and another against the precautionary measures that were imposed on him, after Judge Marco Antonio Fuerte Tapia decided to initiate criminal proceedings for his alleged responsibility. in the crimes of torture, forced disappearance and obstruction of justice, in facts related to the disappearance of the 43 normalistas from Ayotzinapa.
The appeals were filed with the Judicial Power of the Federation (PJF), and it is up to the second and fifteenth district courts to decide on amparo matters, based in Mexico City. In the requests, Murillo’s defenders did not demand any provisional suspension, so the judges must resolve the merits of the demands, that is, establish whether he was linked to the process illegally and if they consider that the precautionary measure of imprisonment should be changed. justified.
Murillo Karam has been imprisoned in the North Prison since August 20, one day after he was arrested outside his home by members of the Secretary of the Navy and the Federal Ministerial Police, in compliance with the arrest warrant issued by Fuerte Wall.
According to the data released at the initial hearing by the agents of the Federal Public Ministry, the former prosecutor carried out or authorized actions that affected the investigations to locate the 43 normalistas who were deprived of their liberty by municipal police officers from Iguala, Cocula and Huitzuco , Guerrero, and then handed them over to cartel members United Warriors.
Likewise, he allegedly knew of acts of torture committed against those allegedly involved in the attack on the students and did not file the corresponding complaints, which would have influenced his disappearance.
The defense requested to consider Murillo’s state of health so that he be granted the benefit of facing his criminal proceedings in freedom, but the judge rejected their arguments and considered valid those of the Attorney General’s Office, which pointed out the possibility of evasion of the former official.
