Vice President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner insisted that the continuity of the judge (María Eugenia) Capuchetti at the head of the investigation is “unsustainable” that is being followed for the assassination attempt she suffered on September 1, and presented in a video “the new and very serious irregularities” of the judicial officer regarding the case.
“In this 4 minute 4 second video, you will learn about the new and very serious irregularities of the non-investigation of Judge Capuchetti,” wrote the Vice President on her Twitter account, where she posted a video that goes through, with the voice-over of the journalist Julia Mengolini, details of the recusal that Fernández de Kirchner presented against the magistrate.
In this 4 minute 4 second video, you will learn about the new and very serious irregularities of Judge Capuchetti’s non-investigation. pic.twitter.com/GuO6wW9cvb
— Cristina Kirchner (@CFKArgentina) November 16, 2022
“On Monday Cristina challenged Judge Capuchetti in the case investigating the assassination attempt. The investigation started very badly. A few hours after the attack and in Capuchetti’s custody, the content of (Fernando’s) cell phone was destroyed and deleted. Sabag Montiel, the murderer who triggered the weapon 15 centimeters from Cristina’s face”, begins the audiovisual material published on the social network.
In the video that lasts 4:04 minutes, heThe Vice President recalls that “during the government of Mauricio Macri and before being appointed to the position, Capuchetti was a regular visitor from the Federal Intelligence Agency (AFI)”.
“In those years, the AFI was commanded by Gustavo Arribas and Silvia Majdalani, both currently being prosecuted for espionage at the Instituto Patria, Cristina’s offices,” he said.
And he added that “as if this were not enough, it was learned from the Bicameral Intelligence Commission that Capuchetti’s sister worked in the listening area of the Counterintelligence Directorate during the same period in which illegal espionage took place.”
In addition, the recusal presented by Fernández de Kirchner indicated “a fact that sows even more suspicion: in the first days of the investigation, after a meeting between judges and chambermaids of Comodoro Py, Capuchetti would have received instructions regarding how he should treat the media in case and possible lines of investigation”.
“After that meeting, her colleagues arranged a meeting with the general editor of Diario Clarín, Ricardo Roa, to which the judge attended accompanied”details the video.
And he points: “Ricardo Roa, the editor-in-chief who, a few hours after the attack, had already invented the theory of the spontaneous action of a loose madman”.
“What were these instructions necessary for? Does someone type or give an opinion behind the judicial authorities on the course of the case, its communication and the successive leaks?” questions the published video.
“In those years, the AFI was commanded by Gustavo Arribas and Silvia Majdalani, both currently being prosecuted for espionage at the Instituto Patria, Cristina’s offices”
During the audiovisual material uploaded to Twitter, the Vice President also reviewed other facts previously presented in the challenge to Capuchetti.
At the beginning of the investigation, “For days, the judge delayed the arrest of two of his ‘Sabag Montiel’ accomplices, Brenda Uliarte and Nicolás Carrizo. Added to this was the halting of the case as soon as evidence linking opposition leaders to the attack appeared.”he pointed out.
Furthermore, the video stated that “Capuchetti rejected the requests for the search and kidnapping of the cell phone of Hernán Carrol”, a member of an extreme right-wing group, whom Sabag Montiel, in his own handwriting, indicated as “the person who would take charge of his situation and appoint his lawyers “.
“Carrol, the same person who would have traveled abroad with the chief of staff of the Intelligence Directorate, under the then Secretary of Security, Gerardo Milman,” he added, noting that “when he was summoned to testify, it was already too late.” because “the day before, Carrol had deleted all the contents of his cell phone.”
The Vice President also focused on “the obsession” of the national deputy (PRO) Gerardo Milman “with security.”
“Deputy Milman had presented a project on August 18 in which he suspiciously warned about a possible false attack against Cristina,” he warned.
And he noted: “But he was not the only one. On August 31, one day before the attack, he submitted a request for reports to find out how the custody of the vice president and her family worked, the number of agents and vehicles assigned to each one from their homes.”
“Why did Milman want to have access to such sensitive information about Cristina’s safety?” questioned and was answered: “We still don’t know because Capuchetti never investigated it.”
He also noted: “The judge did not investigate a fundamental clue about the planning of the attack either. During the search of Brenda Uliarte’s home, a handwritten note was found that referred to the Tueller rule. What is the Tueller rule?”
“It is a security doctrine that calculates the time a person has to draw a weapon and manage to shoot it without taking it out. It is taught to the security forces in the United States and was brought as a novelty to Argentina by Patricia Bullrich, when Gerardo Milman was his vice-minister (of Security),” he explains.
“Deputy Milman had presented a project on August 18 in which he suspiciously warned about a possible false attack against Cristina”
And he asks: “Did Capuchetti find it normal that a person like Brenda Uliarte should have a reference to such a specific and sophisticated technique in her house?”
“Apparently yes and that is why the judge never investigated who wrote that note, trained or trained them “, complete. Finally, the video stressed: “All these facts detailed in the challenge are what make Judge Capuchetti’s continuity at the head of the investigation unsustainable.”
The judge rejected the recusal against him presented by the Fernández de Kirchner complaint.
The magistrate raised the incident to room I of the Federal Chamber of Buenos Aires, so that it can decide if it is up to her to continue intervening in the case.
